China Beckons for Green-Energy Startups

Boston Power’s move reflects China’s willingness to provide incentives for companies in strategic industries.

• Tuesday, September 27, 2011
• By David H. Freedman

Many in the U.S. have an interest in getting clean-tech ventures off the ground. Among them are the government, capital markets, industry, and science labs. But China seems ready to do more on every front to make such projects happen, and to do it right now—without red tape or concern about economic turmoil.

Leading-edge battery maker Boston Power appears to have come to that conclusion. The company is set to move to China, where the government is helping to cut the firm a $125-million deal that no one else is likely to match. The deal could leave the company poised to be a part of what could be a mushrooming market there in electric vehicles. “This is really the next chapter for us,” says Christina Lampe-Onnerud, who founded Boston Power in 2005.

Lampe-Onnerud, a former star technology consultant at Arthur D. Little and top scientist at Bell Communications Research, has been much lauded in the world of high-tech green startups, thanks to Boston Power’s innovations in the chemistry of lithium-ion batteries, and to the success the company has had in selling the resulting higher-capacity, faster-charging batteries to Hewlett-Packard for laptops.

Boston Power seemed even hotter in 2008 when Lampe-Onnerud announced she was setting her sights on producing batteries for the electric-vehicle market. But this market has been slow to materialize and highly competitive, pitting Boston Power against other high-flying startups, including A123 Systems, based in Waltham, Massachusetts.

In 2009, Boston Power failed to win a substantial loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy that would have financed a Massachusetts factory—the company currently manufactures via Taiwanese partner GP Batteries. That same year, a deal backed by the Swedish government to help put the company’s batteries in electric vehicles from foundering Saab went nowhere.

The new deal should put Boston Power, which has raised nearly $200 million in funding, in a better position to compete for at least a foothold in what is expected to eventually be a large global market for electric-vehicle batteries. The deal was set up by GSR Ventures, based in Beijing and Palo Alto, California. GSR has more than $1 billion under management and is investing mostly in high-tech startups doing business in China. Neither GSR’s managing director, Sonny Wu, nor Lampe-Onnerud would provide details on the exact breakdown of the new financing, but both confirmed that the $125-million value represents a mix of private equity and Chinese-government grants, low-interest loans, and financial and tax incentives.

The equity investment comes from venture-capital firms Oak Investment Partners and Foundation Asset Management, which are previous Boston Power investors, as well as from GSR. And the $125 million might not be all there is to the deal, hinted Lampe-Onnerud. “Even more will unfold over the next six months,” she says.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Energy’s Future Today

The sun is the ultimate source of energy for our planet. Its energy is found in fossil fuels as well as all living things. Harnessing its energy holds great promise for the world’s energy needs, and it will be heavily called upon as fossil fuels are depleted.

There is a great deal of information and enthusiasm today about the development and increased production of our global energy needs from alternative energy sources. Solar energy, wind power and moving water are all traditional sources of alternative energy that are making progress. The enthusiasm everyone shares for these developments has in many ways created a sense of complacency that our future energy demands will easily be met.

Alternative energy is an interesting concept when you think about it. In our global society, it simply means energy that is produced from sources other than our primary energy supply: fossil fuels. Coal, oil and natural gas are the three kinds of fossil fuels that we have mostly depended on for our energy needs, from home heating and electricity to fuel for our automobiles and mass transportation.

The problem is, fossil fuels are non-renewable. They are limited in supply and will one day be depleted. There is no escaping this conclusion. Fossil fuels formed from plants and animals that lived hundreds of millions of years ago and became buried way underneath the Earth’s surface where their remains collectively transformed into the combustible materials we use for fuel.

In fact, the earliest known fossil fuel deposits are from the Cambrian Period about 500 million years ago, way before the dinosaurs emerged onto the scene. This is when most of the major groups of animals first appeared on Earth. The later fossil fuels — which provide more substandard fuels like peat or lignite coal (soft coal) — began forming as late as five million years ago in the Pliocene Period. At our rate of consumption, these fuels cannot occur fast enough to meet our current or future energy demands.

Despite the promise of alternative energy sources — more appropriately called renewable energy, collectively they provide only about 7 percent of the world’s energy needs (Source: Energy Information Agency). This means that fossil fuels, along with nuclear energy — a controversial, non-renewable energy source — are supplying 93 percent of the world’s energy resources.

Dams are a major source of hydroelectric energy, such as the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River (pictured). While they collect the vast raw energy provided by water currents, they also create environmental hazards such as silt buildup. They are also significant barriers to fish, such as the salmon of the Pacific Northwest, which must migrate in order for the species to survive. The Hoover Dam is a major source of energy for the southwestern US. (Photo: US Bureau of Reclamation)

Nuclear energy, which is primarily generated by splitting atoms, only provides 6 percent of the world’s energy supplies. And it is not likely to be a major source of world energy consumption because of public pressure and the relative dangers associated with unleashing the power of the atom. Yet, governments such as the United States see its vast potential and are placing pressure on the further exploitation of nuclear energy.

The total world energy demand is for about 400 quadrillion British Thermal Units — or BTUs — each year (Source: US Department of Energy). That’s 400,000,000,000,000,000 BTUs! A BTU is roughly equal to the energy and heat generated by a match. Oil, coal and natural gas supply nearly 88 percent of the world’s energy needs, or about 350 quadrillion BTUs. Of this amount, oil is king, providing about 41 percent of the world’s total energy supplies, or about 164 quadrillion BTUs. Coal provides 24 percent of the world’s energy, or 96 quadrillion BTUs, and natural gas provides the remaining 22 percent, or 88 quadrillion BTUs.

It’s not so much that we mine fossil fuels for our consumption any more than it is to mine salt or tap water supplies way underground. The problems occur when we destroy ecosystems while mining it and while using it. Certainly, if there were a way that fossil fuels can be mined and used in ways that do not harm our ecology, then everything will be okay… in a perfect world. What makes our world perfect is that, it really isn’t perfect according to definition. It is natural, with all things interdependent on each other to live, grow and produce. Fossil fuel mining and oil production can and has caused irreparable damage to our environment.

The Fossil Fuel Dilemma

Fossil fuels exist, and they provide a valuable service. It’s not so much that we use fossil fuels for energy that is problematic, but it’s the side effects of using them that causes all of the problems. Burning fossil fuels creates carbon dioxide, the number one greenhouse gas contributing to global warming. Combustion of these fossil fuels is considered to be the largest contributing factor to the release of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. In the 20th century, the average temperature of Earth rose 1 degree Fahrenheit (1°F). This was a period that saw the most prolific population growth and industrial development (read use of energy) in Earth’s history.

The impact of global warming on the environment is extensive and affects many areas. In the Arctic and Antarctica, warmer temperatures are causing the ice to melt which will increase sea level and change the composition of the surrounding sea water. Rising sea levels alone can impede processes ranging from settlement, agriculture and fishing both commercially and recreationally. Air pollution is also a direct result of the use of fossil fuels, resulting in smog and the degradation of human health and plant growth.

But there’s also the great dangers posed to natural ecosystems that result from collecting fossil fuels, particularly coal and oil. Oil spills have devastated ecosystems and coal mining has stripped lands of their vitality. This is the primary reason to discontinue the pursuit to tap the vast oil reserves in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).

Oil fossil fuels come from marine plants and animals and are found only underneath the ocean or under land that was covered by the oceans millions of years ago. This oil rig is located offshore in the Arabian Gulf. (Photo: Saudi Arabian Embassy – London)

The oil, coal and natural gas companies know these are serious problems. But until our renewable energy sources become more viable as major energy providers, the only alternative for our global population is for these companies to continue tapping into the fossil fuel reserves to meet our energy needs. And you can pretty much count on these companies being there providing energy from renewable sources when the fossil fuels are depleted. Many oil companies, for example, are involved in the development of more reliable renewable energy technologies. For example, British Petroleum Company, today known as BP, has become one of the world’s leading providers of solar energy through its BP Solar division, a business that they are planning on eclipsing their oil production business in the near future.

Future Supplies for Future Energy

Just how limited are our fossil fuel reserves? Some estimates say our fossil fuel reserves will be depleted within 50 years, while others say it will be 100-120 years. The fact is that neither one of these projections is very appealing for a global community that is so heavily dependent on fossil fuels to meet basic human needs. The bottom line: We are going to run out of fossil fuels for energy and we have no choice but to prepare for the new age of energy production since, most certainly, human demands for energy will not decrease.

Modern windmills have become very efficient at transferring the energy of wind to electricity. Wind power is an important part of the overall renewable energy sources for the future. (Photo: CORE)

Nobody really knows when the last drop of oil, lump of coal or cubic foot of natural gas will be collected from the Earth. All of it will depend on how well we manage our energy demands along with how well we can develop and use renewable energy sources.

And here is one very important factor: population growth. As the population grows upwards towards nine billion people over the next 50 years, the world’s energy demands will increase proportionately. Not only will it be important for renewable energy to keep up with the increasing population growth, but it must outpace not only these demands but begin replacing fossil fuel energy production if we are to meet future energy needs.

By the year 2020, world energy consumption is projected to increase by 50 percent, or an additional 207 quadrillion BTUs. If the global consumption of renewable energy sources remains constant, the world’s available fossil fuel reserves will be consumed in 104 years or early in the 22nd century.(Source: US Department of Energy) Clearly, renewable energy resources will play an increasingly vital role in the power generation mix over the next century.

The Ultimate Energy Sources as the Underdogs

Solar energy is having the most immediate impact on home energy needs, and is expected to provide the energy needs for one billion people by the middle of this century. Homes can be fitted with solar panels, such as the ones pictured above. (Photo: Maui Green Energy)

Sun, wind and water are perfect energy sources…depending on where you are. They are non-polluting, renewable and efficient. They are simple: all you need is sunlight, running water and/or wind. Not only do the use of renewable energy sources help reduce global carbon dioxide emissions, but they also add some much-needed flexibility to the energy resource mix by decreasing our dependence on limited reserves of fossil fuels.

Essentially, these renewable energy sources create their own energy. The object is to capture and harness their mechanical power and convert it to electricity in the most effective and productive manner possible. There’s more than enough renewable energy sources to supply all of the world’s energy needs forever; however, the challenge is to develop the capability to effectively and economically capture, store and use the energy when needed.

Take solar energy for example. The ultimate source of energy is the sun. Its energy is found in all things, including fossil fuels. Plants depend on the sun to make food, animals eat the plants, and both ended up becoming the key ingredients for fossil fuels. Without the sun, nothing on this planet would exist.

The sun also provides enough energy that can be stored for use long after the sun sets and even during extended cloudy periods. But making it available is much easier said than done. It would be cost prohibitive to make solar energy mainstream for major world consumption in the near future. The technology is pretty much ready for many business and consumer applications, but it would be way too expensive to replace the current energy infrastructure used for fossil fuel energy. Still, according to the European Photovoltaic Industry Association, solar power could provide energy for more than one billion people by 2020 and 26 percent of global energy needs by 2040.

Wind and hydroelectric power, which have been used effectively for generations, are also rapidly growing energy markets. The principle behind both is that the force of the wind and water currents are passed through turbines which convert their energy into electricity. Commercial wind energy is usually collected by wind “farms” essentially consisting of hundreds of wind turbines (windmills) spread over large plots of land.

But hydroelectric power is harnessed in several different methods. The most popular is through dams, such as the Hoover Dam on the Colorado River. Another form of hydroelectric energy is tidal power. In use since the early 1900s, tidal power stations collect the energy created by the rise and fall of the tides to convert to electricity.

Biomass energy, or energy from burning plants and other organic matter, is one of man’s earliest sources of energy. Wood was once the main source of power for heat, and it still is in many developing countries. Most people in developed countries use wood only for aesthetic purposes or secondary heating, limited mainly to fireplaces and decorative woodstoves. Roughly one to two billion people in the developing nations still use wood as their primary source of heat. It is this group that is seen being among the first to convert to solar heating and energy because there is no other existing infrastructure to hinder its development.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Germany’s Unlikely Champion
Of a Radical Green Energy Path

The disaster at the Fukushima plant in Japan convinced German Chancellor Angela Merkel that nuclear power would never again be a viable option for her country. Now Merkel has embarked on the world’s most ambitious plan to power an industrial economy on renewable sources of energy.

by christian schwägerl

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is anything but a left-wing greenie. The party she leads, the Christian Democratic Union, is the political equivalent of the Republicans in the U.S. Her coalition government is decidedly pro-business. Often described as Europe’s most powerful politician, Merkel’s top priority is job creation and economic growth.

Yet if the chancellor succeeds with her new energy policy, she will become the first leader to transform an industrialized nation from nuclear and fossil fuel energy to renewable power.

In mid-March, Merkel stunned the German public and other governments by announcing an accelerated phasing out of all 17 German nuclear reactors as an immediate reaction to the Fukushima disaster in Japan. The chancellor now says she wants to slash the use of coal, speed up approvals for renewable energy investments, and reduce CO2 emissions drastically. That means that the 81 million Germans living between the North Sea and the Alps are supposed to cover their huge energy needs from wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass within a few decades. Indeed, by 2030 green electricity could be the dominant source of power for German factories and households.

“We want to end the use of nuclear energy and reach the age of renewable energy as fast as possible,” Merkel said.

After the chancellor’s surprising announcement, opposition parties from the left decried it as a political stunt, an act of opportunism, and even panic, ahead of key regional elections in Southern Germany. But after these elections were lost by her party, Merkel soldiered on. In the past weeks, government officials have already offered details of the “energy turn,” as Merkel calls the change.

The numbers that circulate in Berlin’s government district at the moment are staggering. Merkel’s administration plans to shut down the nuclear

The plan makes Germany the world’s most important laboratory of ‘green growth.’

reactors — which in recent years reliably provided up to a quarter of Germany’s huge needs as baseload electricity — by 2022 at the latest. It wants to double the share of renewable energy to 35 percent of consumption in 2020, 50 percent in 2030, 65 percent in 2040, and more than 80 percent in 2050. At the same time, the chancellor vows to cut CO2 emissions (compared to 1990 levels) by 40 percent in 2020, by 55 percent in 2030, and by more than 80 percent in 2050.

That makes Germany the world’s most important laboratory of “green growth.” No other country belonging to the G20 club of economic powers has a comparable agenda. In the U.S., President Obama is expanding state-backed loan guarantees for the nuclear industry to build more reactors, and Republicans are blocking measures to reduce CO2 emissions. Germany is Europe’s largest economy. Making such a country a renewable powerhouse would transform it into the undisputed mecca for everyone on the planet concerned with the environment and green-tech business.

But why would Merkel have Germany do what other big nations deem too risky and too expensive? Is she prepared to sacrifice Germany’s economic viability, which stems from manufacturing and technology export to a great extent?

Clearly, Angela Merkel has reacted to the Fukushima disaster completely differently from Barack Obama and other world leaders. In the past, Merkel too has been pro-nuclear. She was convinced that nuclear power was safe and clean, and that the Chernobyl accident was a result of Soviet inefficiency, not of the technology itself. Only last year, she fought to extend the operation time of Germany’s reactors by 12 years on average, against fierce opposition from the left and environmental groups.

Getty Images

Chancellor Angela Merkel said the Fukushima disaster “has forever changed the way we define risk in Germany.”

In my view, the key to the chancellor’s radical turnaround lies deep in her past. In the 1980s, well before she became a politician, Merkel worked in the former East Germany as a researcher in quantum chemistry, examining the probability of events in the subatomic domain. Her years of research instilled in her the conviction that she has a very good sense of how likely events are, not only in physics but also in politics. Opponents of nuclear energy were “bad at assessing risks,” she told me in the 1990s.

Then came the March disaster at the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant, which made the chancellor realize that she had been terribly wrong about the probability of a nuclear catastrophe in a highly advanced nation. Merkel’s scientific sense of probability and rationality was shaken to the core. If this was possible, she reasoned, something similar might happen in Germany — not a tsunami, of course, but something equally unexpected. In her view, the field trial of nuclear energy had failed. As a self-described rationalist, she felt compelled to act.

”It’s over,” she told one of her advisers immediately after watching on TV as the roof of a Fukushima reactor blew off. “Fukushima has forever changed the way we define risk in Germany.”

Merkel’s conservative environment minister, Norbert Röttgen, recently echoed this line of thinking when he said that the Fukushima disaster “has swapped a mathematical definition of nuclear energy’s residual risk with a terrible real-life experience.” He added: “We can no longer put forward the argument of a tiny risk of ten to the power of minus seven, as we have seen that it can get real in a high-tech society like Japan.”

The new course is a huge challenge in terms of cost and feasibility. Of the current 82 gigawatts of peak demand, about half comes from coal, 23 percent from nuclear, 10 percent from natural gas, and 17 percent from renewables. That means three quarters of Germany’s electricity sources will have to be replaced by green technology within just a few decades, if the nuclear phase-out and the CO2 goals are to be accomplished.

Germany is in a good starting position, though. Since the 1990s, the Renewable Energy Sources Act has paved the way for billions of Euros flowing to consumers and investors for green power projects. The law guarantees that

Chancellor Merkel’s big hope for her ‘energy turn’ is offshore wind energy.

each kilowatt hour of green electricity is fed into the grid and bought at a favorable statutory rate by operators. The rate varies between green energy sources, but is considerably higher than normal electricity prices. It is guaranteed for a 20-year period. This makes investment in renewable energy projects very attractive; witness Google recently pumping money into a German solar park.

As a result, the share of renewable electricity in Germany has jumped from 5 percent in the 1990s to 17 percent today. Traveling through the country, it is easy to see signs of this change. In the north, wind farms are now characteristic of many regions, particularly along the coastlines of the North and Baltic seas. In the south, which is richer in sunlight, photovoltaic cells cover the roofs of whole villages. The bright yellow of rapeseed is prevalent in many regions, as the plant is widely used for producing biodiesel. More and more farms are equipped with big tanks holding “biomethane” derived from maize or agricultural residues.

Merkel’s big hope for her “energy turn” is offshore wind energy. After a sluggish start, several new commercial projects are under construction. On May 2, Merkel proudly pressed a button at a ceremony on the Baltic Sea coast, setting in motion 21 huge offshore wind turbines 16 kilometers away at sea. Taken together, they can provide 50,000 households with renewable energy.

“Baltic 1” is Germany’s first commercial offshore windpark. The turbines have been constructed by Siemens, a company that until recently earned most of its money in the energy sector by building nuclear and fossil-fuel power plants. The wind farm is run by EnBW, a German utility that has so far produced most of its electricity with nuclear power plants. Nothing could symbolize the new policy better than this offshore wind farm.

Merkel’s big bet is that environmental technology will be one of Germany’s most important sources of income. Already, the country’s share in the green-tech world market is 16 percent, which means billions of Euros in business. Renewable energy has generated 300,000 `green collar’ new jobs in the past decade, Röttgen says. Big companies like Siemens and Bosch are determined to become “green multinationals.” Thousands of small- and medium-sized technology companies see green technology as an important part of their business and investment strategy.

Experts agree that the transition will be costly and carry economic risks. Already, consumers in Germany pay about 5 U.S. cents per kilowatt hour as

Experts agree that the transition will be costly and carry economic risks for Germany.

a surcharge to finance the feed-in tariffs, which enable owners of wind turbines or geothermal installations to sell renewably generated electricity back to the grid at favorable rates. For an average family of four, this amounts to 220 U.S. dollars per year. And with investment needs in the hundreds of billions of Euros, consumers can expect a growing surcharge on their monthly bill. This will surely test Germans’ willingness to support Merkel’s plan.

But Röttgen, the environmental minister, points out that mass deployment of renewable energy technology will drive down costs. “When more people consume oil and coal, the price will go up, but when more people consume renewable energy, the price of it will go down“, he says. Röttgen argues that instead of sending billions of Euros to Russia and other sources of imported energy, Germany will now be able “to give that money to our green-tech engineers and local craftsmen.” Still, keeping the cost of the transition low and stopping energy-intensive companies from relocating to Romania or China will be very difficult.

In addition to the challenge of huge costs, a complete overhaul of the energy infrastructure is necessary. It is not enough to install wind turbines and solar panels. A new grid is needed, as are ways to store green electricity. As wind and sunshine are highly variable, electricity will increasingly flow intermittently. Power will have to flow from offshore wind farms in the north of the country over many hundred kilometers to the industrial centers in the west and the south.

Experts estimate that more than 4,000 kilometers of new “eco-electricity highways” are necessary to connect renewable power plants to consumers and avoid power outages. Storing green electricity when the wind is blowing strongly or when there is ample sunlight is an unsolved challenge.

But even if all technological problems are solved, it is not easy to roll them out nationwide. Many Germans don’t like the sight of wind turbines, which are called “asparagus.” New hydro plants and some wind power installations face fierce opposition. So do those “eco-electricity highways,” which still look like ordinary power lines to their neighbors. Local residents have yet to be convinced that they have to sacrifice undisturbed horizons for the greater good.

MORE FROM YALE e360

Along Scar from Iron Curtain,
A Green Belt Rises in Germany

A forbidding, 870-mile network of fences and guard towers once ran the length of Germany, separating East and West. Now, as journalist Christian Schwägerl reports, one of the world’s most unique nature reserves is being created along the old “Death Strip.”
READ MORE

To the surprise of many, supplying an industrial nation with renewable energy also raises environmental concerns. The construction of offshore wind parks has been found to harm the ears of the harbor porpoise, a small whale species that is protected by law in Europe. Toxicologists are worried about dangerous level of cadmium, a heavy metal, in photovoltaic cells that might poison firefighters and create disposal problems in the future. And environmentalists are worried that the expansion of cornfields will dry out peaty soils, leading to greenhouse gas emissions, and be harmful for biological diversity. Germany would also have to rely more on natural gas, a fossil fuel, in the intermediate term if nuclear power will be phased out.

Despite the many problems and pitfalls, the chancellor’s new course is already attracting admiration from abroad. William Reilly, the former administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said on a recent visit to Germany that he was impressed by Merkel’s energy turn and the example it sets for the rest of the industrialized world. “It was breathtaking to see this huge change by a conservative government,” he told me for a report in Der Spiegel magazine after meeting German politicians, NGOs, and business representatives.

The Japanese are certainly watching. While Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan on May 8 reiterated his support for nuclear power, officials in the Japanese embassy in Berlin already wonder aloud how their government will justify sticking with nuclear energy when a country like Germany is taking bold steps to thrive without.

POSTED ON 09 May 2011 IN Biodiversity Business & Innovation Energy Oceans Europe Europe

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Today is Blog Action Day, a day in which over 15,000 blogs will be discussing one very important topic – the environment. I am proud to join these other blogs to help bring attention to environmental awareness.

I chose to write about green energy because it fascinates me. The fact that we have technology that harnesses earth’s forces to give us sustainable sources of power is an encouraging sign that eventually, we will not be so reliant on petroleum – and its high costs and environmental side effects. Here are a few sustainable energy sources that will one day lessen our need for oil, coal, and other fossil fuels.

Alternative green energy sources that can be used to power or heat homes:

Solar Panels - Solar panels harness power from the most abundant power source on earth – solar energy. Solar cells convert light energy into electrical energy by converting photons into electrons (end of science talk). Solar panels have been used for years in remote locations and in outer space, and are now becoming more popular for residential and commercial uses.

Unfortunately, a solar panel system large enough to power a residential size home costs between $15,000-30,000. The federal government offers tax deductions to people and businesses who install a solar power system and many individual states have also followed suit. However, in most cases, solar panels are still far too expensive to be used as a mainstream source of electric power. The encouraging news is that prices continue to drop and solar panel technology continues to improve.

Home users of solar panels generally tie their house into the power grid so they can access power when solar energy is not providing enough power for their home. Another benefit to this is that excess power can be sold back to the power company. Depending on how much energy your house uses versus how much it produces, it is possible to recoup your investment fairly quickly and eventually make a profit by selling electricity to the power company.

Wind Turbines - Wind turbines capture wind energy to spin turbine blades and drive a shaft to produce electricity. This, and similar technology, has been around for many years, and is used in many applications. In fact, wind turbines work much like the alternator in your car, or the generators in a hydroelectric dam.

While wind power has been used by humans for over 3,000 years, recent advances in wind turbine technology have made wind turbines a viable source for generating electric power. Giant wind farms convert wind energy into electric energy that is then sold to homes and businesses.

It is even possible to buy a wind turbine large enough to power a residential home. The cost however, runs around $15,000 installed. The best part is, like solar panels, there are often tax deductions available. Though it will take several years to recoup the expenditure of a wind turbine, more people are installing them as a means of powering their home, farm, or business.

Wind turbines have the same capability to produce excess energy and for some people can be used to make money. However, it generally takes several years before the initial expense is recouped.

Solar water heaters - Solar water heaters use solar power to heat water which is then pumped to a heat exchanger, where it gives off its heat. The heat in the heat exchanger is then used to raise the temperature of air going into your heating system, or to raise the temperature of the water in your hot water heater. This results in less energy used to heat your house or water for daily use.

These systems are usually fairly simple in design and cost between $5,000-7,000 to install. Again, federal and local incentives may substantially lower the total installation cost. Total savings depend on where your house is located and how much sun it gets, but are usually around $250 per year. It may take a long time to repay the cost of installation, but the cost may just be worth it if you plan on living in your home for a long time.

Heat exchangers - Similar to solar water heaters, which incorporate a heat exchanger, these systems often involve pumping water or air through a series of underground pipes. The earth several feet underground maintains a steady temperature year round – usually around 55-65 degrees F.

In the summer the water or air is pumped underground where it cools down, and is then pumped through a heat exchanger before going in to the air conditioning system. This can substantially lessen air conditioning costs. In the winter, the same thing happens, but this time the air is warmed by the underground temperatures before it passes through the heating system. Again, is is much easier and cheaper to heat warm air than cold air.

These systems are easiest to install when a house is being built because they can be laid under the foundation. However, if your house does not already have this type of system installed, it can be done – but the installation company will have to dig up your yard and it will take a lot more work. These systems cost several thousand dollars to install, and savings depend on location and amount of use. Like these other systems, local and federal tax incentives may be available.

The Future of Energy – These forms of energy have two major factors in common – once they have been installed, the cost of upkeep is minimal and the energy to power them is free. Once the initial investment has been earned back through savings or by selling excess power that has been generated, the remaining savings are free and can even make you a profit!

As these technologies become more common, they will both improve and become more affordable. I don’t think it is unrealistic to think that in the near future most new homes will come with the option of adding solar panels or heat exchangers at a reasonable cost. And I hope many people take advantage of these technologies.

Posted in Uncategorized | 8 Comments »

Go Green-Green Energy!
September 18, 2011    Posted by Amanda under Green Energy, Hojo
No Comments

You always hear talk about going green and green energy but do you know what it means? Green energy is sustainable energy, energy that can be recycled over and over again. There are many things that happen naturally that can produce these green energies. There are also numerous ways to harness these energies and get them working for us. Simple green energy savers can cut down on your energy bill cost and make you feel great that you are protecting the environment and still living comfortably. Some of the sustainable energies include wind energy, solar energy, and now magnetic energy.
Wind is a green energy. Giant windmills are created and then used to harness the energy of the wind. The giant windmills produce about 59% of usable energy. The windmill’s harnesses this power by the wind driving the blades of the mill in turn turning the inside turbine to one full revolution. This energy has been used since olden times and proof of which is when you look at European countries. The Netherlands are a great example of being pioneers of green energy. They used the winds power to power their windmills to pump out water away from land. The Spanish armada was defeated because the British were able to harness this energy for their good. As useful as these windmills are it is not feasible for today’s world.
There’s no where to put it and most American’s may still complain that it may interfere with their satellite connection. There is however another green energy sources out there that are less of a hassle than erecting a giant windmill in your back yard.
Another green energy source that you may have heard of is solar energy.  Solar energy used by harnessing the sun’s rays. There is tons of energy pack in the sun’s rays due to the atoms moving at very high speeds. The faster the atom has to move the more friction or energy it produces. Solar panels first created by NASA space station. They were used on all of their rockets as a way of collecting solar energy for the ship. Solar panels are in such a high demand that the American market couldn’t keep up with production lines and are now back ordered. Getting these panels can also be pricey but worth it in the long run. There have been reports of some of them breaking and the maintenance can get a little pricey. If price is a major concern check out the Hojo motor.
Hojo motor is a new product that uses magnets and the magnetic field around us. This manual itself for the Hojo motor is being sold to Americans all over the world. The manual gives a step by step on how to build it that doesn’t seem complicated or stressful at all. The Hojo motor also produces enough energy to power your house because it does not need to rely on weather. There is no wastes being made by the motor which provides a clean green energy that can be used to power your house’s air conditioner during summer months of some of the hottests states like Florida. The motor is more reliable than some of the other green sources and will save you on the upfront costs and repair work if anything were to happen.
Using green energy doesn’t mean it will make you one with nature or that your way of life will have to change dramatically even. Green energy is a source of energy that is able to be recycled and used over and over. Air or wind will always be around and can be easily harnessed. The sun provides enough solar energy that it has been the main proprietor in sustaining life on Earth. If building a windmill or financing solar panels may be out of the question for you the Hojo motor that one can build uses the magnetic energy and is much cheaper than some of the other alternatives out there.
You can see the plans for the Hojo Motor by Clicking Right Here; it’s a lot less expensive than you would imagine!
Tags: Green Energy, Hojo

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »