Green Tech

General Electric on Tuesday said that it has reached an agreement to deploy its coal gasification technology in China, a move the company says will advance underground storage of carbon dioxide.

The energy giant announced a set of agreements in a ceremony in Beijing, including deals for GE's high-speed rail and hybrid locomotive engines. The activity comes the same day that China and the U.S. announced a number of energy-related research initiatives in coal, electric vehicles, and smart-grid technologies.

(Credit: General Electric)

GE and coal power plant operator Shenhua Group signed a memorandum of understanding to create a joint venture to build plants that use GE's coal gasification products. They projected that a definitive agreement would be done by the first half of next year.

Coal gasification, already used in dozens of facilities, is cleaner than the traditional coal-fired process used in power plants because pollutants can be removed during power generation, according to the Department of Energy. Gasification is a thermo-chemical process where coal or other carbon-based feedstocks are treated under high heat and pressure with steam so that they break down into what's called syngas, which contains hydrogen and carbon monoxide. That syngas is then burned to run an electricity turbine.

In the planned projects in China, GE and Shenhua expect to build integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) facilities in China, including a commercial-scale plant that separates out carbon dioxide for underground storage.

Because the U.S. and China rely heavily on coal for power generation, policy makers say that carbon capture and storage at coal plants is an important technology for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants.

The U.S. Trade Development Agency will said it will fund the "initial steps" toward a plant in China based on GE technology.

The president of GE's Power and Water business, Steve Bolze, said in a statement that additional plants with coal gasification and carbon storage are needed to scale up the industry and lower costs.

Autodesk is making a revised method for tracking greenhouse gas emissions available for free to other companies.

The design software company on Monday published the results of its own program to reduce its environmental footprint. It also open-sourced its methodology, called Corporate Finance Approach to Climate-Stabilizing Targets (C-FACT).

Although many companies do track their greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), there is not a standardized way for setting targets or reporting that data in the U.S.

Autodesk's methodology is based on the the long-term target of reducing global emissions by 85 percent by 2050, set by United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. From there, companies can set targets based on their relative contribution to global gross domestic product.

"Corporate GHG target setting has become a little like the Wild West, with few laws, little scrutiny, and quite a bit of aimless shooting," said Emma Stewart, senior program lead for Autodesk's sustainability initiative, in a statement. Autodesk is encouraging others to use the method because the targets will be proportional to a company's economic contribution.

The company has committed to using the C-FACT method through 2020. From 2008 to 2009, its greenhouse gas footprint increased by 1 percent. But its revenue grew during that period, so the "carbon intensity per unit of added value" dropped. Carbon intensity by square foot and per employee also dropped in the period.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--President Barack Obama on Friday called on the U.S. Congress to pass energy-and-climate legislation, a move he said would stimulate technology innovation and improve the economic competitiveness of the United States.

Obama delivered a speech at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology here after touring student laboratories and before attending a fund-raiser for Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick.

President Obama speaking on clean energy at MIT on Friday.

(Credit: Martin LaMonica/CNET)

A "comprehensive" energy-and-climate bill will address both environmental and economic problems, Obama said. Countries around the world recognize that energy supplies are limited while demand is rising. That situation is giving rise to a "peaceful competition" among countries to develop clean-energy technologies that "will propel the 21st century."

"There are going to be all sorts of debate both in (the) laboratory and on Capital Hill, but there is no question that we have to do these things," he said. "The nation that wins that competition will be the nation to lead the global economy. I'm convinced of that, and I want America to be that nation."

Obama urged Congress to pass an energy-and-climate bill the Senate is now considering, the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act. He specifically praised the bill co-sponsor Democratic Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, who was present at the talk, and Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsay Graham. The senators co-wrote an editorial in the New York Times earlier this month outlining the main components of a desired bill, which was seen as a key step toward passage.

The House bill, which narrowly passed in May, includes a national mandate for utilities to use renewable energy and a cap-and-trade system in which large polluters can buy and sell permits for carbon dioxide emissions.

The president did not weigh into the details of the existing bills, but he did outline the contours of an energy policy that reduces the country's reliance on fossil fuels while making better use of natural resources.

The ingredients of energy policy should include clean use of coal, oil, and natural gas; "safe nuclear power;" sustainably grown biofuels; and energy from wind, solar, and wave power, Obama said.

"It is a transformation that will be made as swiftly and carefully as possible, to ensure we are doing everything we can to grow this economy in the short, medium, and long term. And I do believe that a consensus is growing to achieve exactly that," he said.

Obama said the Pentagon and energy security hawks are stepping up efforts to reduce oil imports while businesses and environmentalists are working together. Young people, too, view energy-and-climate as the challenge of their generation, he added.

"We are seeing a convergence. The naysayers, the folks (who) would pretend this is not an issue--they are being marginalized," Obama said.

He said key pieces of the Senate bill have been approved in various committees but he warned that opposition to passing an energy-and-climate bill will increase as passage gets closer.

There were about 700 people at the MIT talk, including a number of local green-technology entrepreneurs, investors, and students at the university, which has become a hotbed for energy science and technology research.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.--A change in national energy policies would help spur innovation around green technologies, but policymakers are motivated by power and pet projects rather than energy security or environmental protection, a panel of energy and business experts argued here Thursday.

The speakers--three academics with expertise in energy and economics and a venture capitalist from Khosla Ventures--delved into the question of what role government should play in energy at the EmTech emerging technology conference at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology on Thursday. On the whole, they were pessimistic about the prospects of effective legislation for promoting a cleaner energy industry.

The talk was timely. Although political debate in Washington has been dominated by health care over the past few months, the Senate is expected to take up a climate change and energy bill as early as next week, following a House version which narrowly passed in May. The broad House bill proposes a national system for regulating greenhouse gases, introduces higher efficiency standards, and calls for a mandate on renewable energy from utilities.

Many companies and investors see energy as a promising area of economic growth, with more than $5.8 billion of venture capital placed in green tech last year. But energy is very different from information technology or other traditional tech industries. Bringing new energy products to market requires not only technology breakthroughs but also coordination among start-ups, large corporations, financiers, and government.

The panelists argued that the House bill of the version is far from perfect but it's an important step because it puts a price on carbon emissions. Under a cap-and-trade program--one of which is already in effect in the U.S.-- large polluters, such as utilities and manufacturers, are given permits to pollute. Those carbon allowances can be bought and sold among participants so that they stay under a cap set by the government.

"We can go into the details about the problems with all the subsidy schemes that have been tried but fundamentally there is this common sense that underlies cap and trade, which is that if something is bad, you should tax it and that is, in effect, what cap and trade does. And that puts things that don't have that bad characteristic in a better competitive position," said Richard Schmalensee, the director of the MIT Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research.

Right now, there are subsidies and tax credits to promote the installation of solar and wind power. In the federal stimulus plan, the Department of Energy was allotted tens of billions of dollars to fund long-term research and promote development of existing technologies, such as plug-in electric vehicles.

In the past, renewable energy policies have led to boom and bust periods, which resulted in many failed companies, said Henry Lee, the director of environment and natural resources programs at Harvard University's school of government.

To avoid that cycle, the U.S. needs a combination of policies, including tax incentives, research money, and a cap-and-trade program, Lee said. Caps on carbon emissions won't start to take hold for many years, panelists said. So, abandoning existing supports for solar now would essentially shut that industry down, even though the cost of solar continues to drop, Schmalensee said.

Rising oil prices can help drive investments in clean-energy technologies, but the volatility of prices makes sustained investment difficult, said Lee. Another challenge related to energy in the U.S. is the difficulty of locating good spots for wind and solar power projects and the resistance from states over national efforts to build new transmission lines to transfer solar and wind power.

No kind words
In practice, policy making around energy is messy business, the panelists said. It's even harder now, given the fierce partisanship now in Washington and the shaky economic situation, noted Lee.

The trend in energy policy has to been to promote a set of technologies, such as fuel cells or biofuels, for a while but not stay with it, said Lee. Corn ethanol, for example, has been criticized for questionable environmental benefits and contributing to higher food prices, but maintaining the program makes sense because second-generation ethanol could deliver significant improvements, he said.

"One of the problems with Washington is that they fall in love and then they fall out of love after two or three years," said Lee. "But you can't give up on these things after three or four years and in our government we have a tendency to do that. We don't have a lot of patience and it takes time to make things that really work."

Small green-tech start-ups and venture capitalists are now spending a significant amount of time in Washington because energy is heavily regulated. But there's concern that bills are structured to favor certain technologies, said Alex Kinnier from Khosla Ventures, a Silicon Valley venture capital firm that is making an aggressive push into green tech.

"We're all in agreement we want a price on carbon...The thing that concerns us greatly is that the ways these rules can be written can very much bias who the winners are and who the losers are over the long term and can sub-optimize the ultimate solutions," Kinnier said.

For example, incentives to store carbon underground at coal plants will lead many companies into that field. But Kinnier said that policies should also encourage technologies that use carbon dioxide to make a product, such as building materials or chemicals.

Ken Zweibel, director of the GW Solar Institute at George Washington University, criticized the trend toward overemphasizing high-risk, high-reward energy research. "Programs to do practical research have shrunk during the last five years and programs to do high-risk, blue-sky research have gone through roof," he said. Solar photovoltaics are becoming more affordable as prices fall, but proposals to the newly formed ARPA-E are unlikely to yield anything useful, Zweibel said.

He also complained policymakers make decisions based on "very shallow knowledge" and are easily swayed by the media. Fears that China is taking over leadership in low-carbon technologies appear to motivate policymakers more than protecting the environment or concerns regarding climate change, Zweibel and Schmalensee said.

"We are not convinced that we have a global warming problem," said Zweibel. "Let's face it--that's the truth."

Updated September 26 at 6:50 a.m. PT with correction to Alex Kinnier's affiliation.

(Credit: Invest Maldives/Republic of Maldives)

The Republic of Maldives has signed a partnership with a tech company to develop biochar for its soils, both parties announced this week.

Biochar, a method of carbon capture and storage, is typically produced by heating biomass in a kiln until it turns into a manmade charcoal. That biochar can then be buried to enrich soil for agriculture. In some cases, biochar can be used as fuel.

The deal with U.K.-based Carbon Gold is part of the Maldives' plans to be carbon-neutral by 2020.

With the help of Carbon Gold, the Maldives will manufacture biochar from woody biomass, including coconut shells, for use in its own soil. As part of the deal, Carbon Gold will also launch an informational campaign directed at Maldivians on the benefits of using biochar rather than imported fertilizers to enhance soil quality for agriculture.

"The Maldives is already adversely affected by climate change so I warmly welcome this relationship with Carbon Gold. Biochar has a crucial role in helping us achieve carbon neutral status as well as providing an economic and environmental boost to our people," Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed said in a statement.

Though not a very powerful player on the global carbon stage, the Republic of Maldives is significant for being at the front line of climate change. If the Earth warms and seas rise as predicted, scientists believe the Indian Ocean archipelago country will be the first to go under water.

(Credit: Royal Society)

Geoengineering is not a last resort, but the next necessary step to recalibrate the Earth's climate unless carbon emissions are significantly reduced in the near future, the Royal Society, the U.K.'s national academy of sciences, announced Tuesday.

"It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing CO2 emissions we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future, and geoengineering will be the only option left to limit further temperature increases," John Shepherd, chair of the Royal Society's geoengineering study and a professor of Earth system science at the University of Southampton, said on behalf of the group.

The report "Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty" (PDF) urged carbon emissions reduction as the primary means of halting climate change. But it looked at geoengineering--engineering the environment on a large scale to purposely manipulate the world's climate--very seriously.

In past years, geoengineering has been thought of an as option of last resort, but the Royal Society asserted that some of the safer geoengineering techniques, like aggressively planting forests, could be implemented currently in conjunction with carbon reduction efforts.

Since geoengineering has the potential to affect people on a global scale, the group further recommended that an international organization like the U.N. Commission for Sustainable Development begin developing policies and a means for resolving anticipated geoengineering political conflicts.

"Assuming that acceptable standards for effectiveness, safety, public acceptance and cost were established, why should appropriate geoengineering options not be added to the portfolio of options that society will need and may wish to use to combat the challenges posed by climate change?" said the report.

With that in mind the group evaluated the safety, expense, effectiveness, and quickness of deployment for projects falling under two main classes of geoengineering: carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar-radiation management (SRM).

CDR, efforts to remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, included things like afforestation, encouraging plankton growth, and carbon capture and storage in the form of burying carbon-rich biomass or using biochar for fuel.

The SRM suggestions for manipulating the Earth so that it absorbs less solar radiation included more seemingly far-out options like painting all roofs white to reflect sunlight, placing thousands of space mirrors in near-Earth orbits to reflect sunlight, and spraying aerosols into the stratosphere.

The group said it generally favored CDR projects over SRM because they involved processes closer to natural occurrences, while the side effects of SRM projects are unknown and therefore more dangerous.

(Credit: Sandbag)

Part environmental watchdog and part social-networking site, Sandbag lobbies the United Nations and European Union for tighter caps on carbon emissions and permits, while buying up carbon credits.

The U.K.-based not-for-profit community organization, whose motto is "real action on climate change," launched in September 2008. It uses donations to buy up EU carbon credits and cancel them in an effort to drive up the price of carbon credits in the marketplace.

The group has started to gain a following. The Guardian Newspaper Group became a corporate sponsor earlier this year, and on Monday, two London hospitals agreed to sell Sandbag 2,000 tonnes worth of carbon credits. It's the equivalent of taking 1,000 cars off the road, according to Sandbag's founder Bryony Worthington.

The group's pitch, which is explained through a silent video "Sandbag in 60 seconds," is that if polluting is made expensive enough, companies will invest more in technology to clean up their processes rather than buying emissions credits to cover their excess pollution.

In July 2009, Sandbag put out a report (PDF) on the European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading System (EU-ETS), the EU's current program that regulates about 50 percent of carbon emissions in the EU and doles out about 2 billion tradable permits each year.

Sandbag asserted in the report, as it's been widely reported, that pollution has been reduced not so much as a result of big industry cleaning up their processes but because production itself has been down due to the recession.

The report goes on to say that as a result of the economic downturn, there is a glut of permits and no real economic incentive for companies to reduce pollution.

"Industry is likely to have nearly 400 million tonnes worth of surplus permits across the period 2008-2012. (As a result, industrial sectors will not have to reduce their emissions.) They will either be able to sell their surplus for windfall profits of over 5 billion euros (at current market value) or bank them for future use depressing the price of carbon in the next phase of trading," Sandbag said in its July 2009 report.

Sandbag has been lobbying the EU to address the issue by following the suggestion made by France and Ireland, which is to essentially reduce the amount of carbon permits made available going forward, according to its report.

In addition to its carbon credit report and buy-back plan, Sandbag has also mapped out by country how emissions credits have been allotted.

Interested people can use the organization's Web site tools to view Google Maps plotting emissions data for 2008 in relation to how many permits are allotted or needed for a given area. Maps are by country with an option to zoom in to a particular area of interest.

A map of the U.K. showing areas with excess carbon permits to sell.

(Credit: Sandbag)

Katherine Sierra

(Credit: The World Bank)

SAN FRANCISCO--How will a shift in carbon reduction play out with the world's poor? This is an issue The World Bank is grappling with as it prepares for the international climate change summit in Copenhagen this December.

Katherine Sierra, the vice president for sustainable development at The World Bank, and Awais Khan, the director of KPMG's Clean Tech Venture Capital Practice, spoke on this topic Tuesday here at the Commonwealth Club.

Along with higher temperatures, climate change is causing rising sea levels, shifts in rain/snow patterns, and an increase in weather-related natural disasters. Although the impact is worldwide, people in developing countries get the brunt of it with severe risk to their agriculture, food, and water, Sierra said.

"We took a major step a couple years ago because we felt we weren't doing as good a job as we should have in integrating environment into our programs," said Sierra. "We actually merged our infrastructure practice with the environmental and social practices."

On top of being more vulnerable to climate change, countries in the developing world have a shortage of infrastructure. According to The World Bank, 1.6 billion people in the developing world still do not have access to electricity, and those who do may have only intermittent service.

"There are areas in Pakistan that have 12 to 14 hours of blackouts per day," said Khan. If the shortest way to fix that problem is through burning coal, he explains, that's what governments will do.

However, being the ninth-largest coal deposit in the world--with 186 billion tons of coal, Pakistan's "government is very favorable to using cleaner coal technologies," Khan said. "Sometimes we don't give enough credit to governments of developing countries."

The event fell on the heels of an article Sierra wrote for The San Francisco Examiner last week, where she explained what The World Bank, an international financial institution that loans money to developing countries, intends to do regarding climate change and the world's poor. Last year, The World Bank gave almost $7.6 billion for energy financing, a third of which went to renewable energy and energy efficiency. Projects included putting in rapid bus transport in five major cities in Mexico and working on smart grids in Turkey.

But another third of the $7.6 billion put forth was given to fund traditional fossil fuels. This is what skeptics generally point to when criticizing The World Bank's initiatives and intentions. The nonprofit Bank Information Center, for example, released a study in February on how The World Bank's energy financing is being felt by developing countries

The organization found that although The World Bank increased funding for renewable energy (by 11 percent), it dramatically increased funding for fossil fuels (by 102 percent) last year. "The bank's continued lending focus on fossil fuels commits many developing countries to fossil-fuel based energy for the next 20 to 40 years," said Heike Mainhardt-Gibbs, a consultant with the Bank Information Center.

The Bank Information Center points out that when developing countries begin to work on greenhouse gas emission reductions, it will be more difficult and expensive because of their extended use of fossil fuels.

The World Bank says the fossil fuels they are funding are increasingly clean coal technology and natural gas, which is the cleanest fossil fuel. "We want hospitals with refrigerators, schools with light bulbs," Sierra said during her talk, "if you look at any projections, they tell us under any circumstance we still need fossil fuels."

This will all be hashed out come December when representatives from over 180 countries meet in Copenhagen to work on a new treaty that addresses global warming. Within this international agreement, countries will look at what is doable and possible to lower greenhouse gas emissions while still trying to get energy to the world's poor.

The thought of an artificial tree usually excites memories of building and ornamenting a Christmas centerpiece. But here's an innovation that will put those plastic branches to shame: scientists at Columbia University are developing a structure that can capture carbon 1,000 times faster than a real tree.

The carbon-capturing structure looks more like a cylinder than a soaring Redwood.

(Credit: Global Research Technologies)

Klaus Lackner, a professor of geophysics at the university, has been working on the project since 1998, according to a CNN report, and is optimistic about a near-future application.

Modern improvements in coal-fired power plants have reduced carbon emissions, but Lackner is seeking a different function. The "tree" would be used to trap carbon that has already been emitted into the air by car gasoline or airplane fuel, CNN reports.

Unlike the real thing, the synthetic "tree" doesn't need direct sunlight, water, a trunk, or branches to function, as it looks more like a cylinder than a soaring Redwood. The concept, which Lackner says is flexible in size and can be placed nearly anywhere, works by collecting carbon dioxide on a sorbent, cleaning and pressurizing the gas, and releasing it. Similar to the way a sponge collects water, the sorbent would collect carbon dioxide.