Treehugger.com

ENERGY: The race for new sources of energy production and conservation are continuing even as nuclear power is ignored. The hugely expensive Cap & Trade bills loom on the hazy horizon and hyperbole now rules the climate-change “catastrophe” debate at levels rivaling that of politics.

By Dennis Mullin

It's a tall order: Over the next few decades, the world will need to wean itself from dependence on fossil fuels and drastically reduce greenhouse gases. Current technology will take us only so far; major breakthroughs are required. What might those breakthroughs be? Here's a look at five technologies that, if successful, could radically change the world energy picture, according to the Wall Street Journal.

They present enormous opportunities. The ability to tap power from space, for instance, could jump-start whole new industries. Technology that can trap and store carbon dioxide from coal-fired plants would rejuvenate older ones.

Success isn't assured. The technologies present difficult engineering challenges, and some require big scientific leaps in lab-created materials or genetically modified plants. And innovations have to be delivered at a cost that doesn't make energy much more expensive. If all of that can be done, one of these technologies could be a game-changer.

SOLAR POWER: For more than three decades, visionaries have imagined tapping solar power where the sun always shines in space. If we could place giant solar panels in orbit around the Earth, and beam even a fraction of the available energy back to Earth, they could deliver nonstop electricity to any place on the planet.

The technology may sound like science fiction, but it's simple: Solar panels in orbit about 22,000 miles up beam energy in the form of microwaves to earth, where it's turned into electricity and plugged into the grid. (The low-powered beams are considered safe.) A ground receiving station a mile in diameter could deliver about 1,000 megawatts -- enough to power on average about 1,000 U.S. homes.

The cost of sending solar collectors into space is the biggest obstacle, so it's necessary to design a system lightweight enough to require only a few launches. A handful of countries and companies aim to deliver space-based power in as early as a decade.

CAR BATTERIES:  Electrifying vehicles could slash petroleum use and help clean the air (if electric power shifts to low-carbon fuels like wind or nuclear). But it's going to take better batteries. Lithium-ion batteries, common in laptops, are favored for next-generation plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles. They're more powerful than other auto batteries, but they're expensive and still don't go far on a charge; the Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid coming next year, can run about 40 miles on batteries alone. Ideally, electric cars will get closer to 400 miles on a charge. While improvements are possible, lithium-ion's potential is limited.

One alternative, lithium-air, promises 10 times the performance of lithium-ion batteries and could deliver about the same amount of energy, pound for pound, as gasoline. A lithium-air battery pulls oxygen from the air for its charge, so the device can be smaller and more lightweight. A handful of labs are working on the technology, but scientists think that without a breakthrough they could be a decade away from commercialization.

UTILITY STORAGE: Everybody's rooting for wind and solar power. How could you not? But wind and solar are use-it-or-lose-it resources. To make any kind of difference, they need better storage. Scientists are attacking the problem from a host of angles -- all of which are still problematic.

One, for instance, uses power produced when the wind is blowing to compress air in underground chambers; the air is fed into gas-fired turbines to make them run more efficiently. One of the obstacles: finding big, usable, underground caverns. Similarly, giant batteries can absorb wind energy for later use, but some existing technologies are expensive, and others aren't very efficient. While researchers are looking at new materials to improve performance, giant technical leaps aren't likely.

Lithium-ion technology may hold the greatest promise for grid storage, where it doesn't have as many limitations as for autos. As performance improves and prices come down, utilities could distribute small, powerful lithium-ion batteries around the edge of the grid, closer to customers. There, they could store excess power from renewables and help smooth small fluctuations in power, making the grid more efficient and reducing the need for backup fossil-fuel plants. And utilities can piggy-back on research efforts for vehicles.

CARBON STORAGE: Keeping coal as an abundant source of power means slashing the amount of carbon dioxide it produces. That could mean new, more efficient power plants. But trapping C02 from existing plants -- about two billion tons a year -- would be the real game-changer.

Techniques for modest-scale CO2 capture exist, but applying them to big power plants would reduce the plants' output by a third and double the cost of producing power. So scientists are looking into experimental technologies that could cut emissions by 90 percent while limiting cost increases.

Nearly all are of these ideas are in the very early stages, and it's too soon to tell which method will win out. One promising technique burns coal and purified oxygen in the form of a metal oxide, rather than air; this produces an easier-to-capture concentrated stream of CO2 with little loss of plant efficiency. The technology has been demonstrated in small-scale pilots, and will be tried in a one-megawatt test plant next year. But it might not be ready for commercial use until 2020.

NEW BIOFUELS: One way to wean ourselves from oil is to come up with renewable sources of transportation fuel. That means a new generation of biofuels made from non-food crops. Researchers are devising ways to turn lumber and crop wastes, garbage and inedible perennials like switchgrass into competitively priced fuels. But the most promising next-generation biofuel comes from algae.

Algae grow fast, consume carbon dioxide and can generate more than 5,000 gallons a year per acre of biofuel, compared with 350 gallons a year for corn-based ethanol. Algae-based fuel can be added directly into existing refining and distribution systems; in theory, the U.S. could produce enough of it to meet all of the nation's transportation needs.

But it's early. Dozens of companies have begun pilot projects and small-scale production. Producing algae biofuels in any quantity means finding reliable sources of inexpensive, nutrients and water, managing pathogens that could reduce yield, and developing and cultivating the most productive algae strains.

 ATTIDUDES: A new poll shows that 62 percent of Americans rate “the condition of the natural environment in the world today” as excellent, good or fair, with just a third saying poor or very poor. But that hasn’t stopped the hyperbole over climate change, which has reached near political proportions. HBO television host Bill Maher, who has been having a fit over the HI flu vaccinations, claims that “unlike global warming, this is not proven science.” Many scientists would argue that despite Al Gore’s contention that “the debate is over,” the argument over climate change, how serious it is, and what must be done about is anything but clearly settled. If anything, most indicators show that the world’s temperatures are falling, and the prospects of a new Ice Age are higher than the many untested models that forecast a world on fire.

HYPERBOLE: UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown has repeatedly said that his nation faces a "catastrophe" of floods, droughts and killer heat waves if world leaders fail to agree a deal on climate change. He told negotiators at a world climate conference that they have 50 days to save the world from global warming. Whether or not current scientific understanding warrants his warning of "catastrophe," for the UK if greenhouse gas levels rise unchecked, is open to question. A recent report by Kofi Annan's Global Humanitarian Forum found the UK was one of 12 nations least likely to be affected by climate impacts.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger now supports controversial proposals by the California's energy commission to impose strict energy consumption limits on TVs with screens that are more than 40 inches. The commission claims that California's estimated 35 million televisions and related gadgets account for about 10% of household energy consumption in the state. Experts say that the large LCD or plasma screen sets can use three times as much power as traditional models.

HUGE COSTS: Some TV manufacturers are fighting the plan but have said little to sway the commission, which could vote on it within weeks. The new law, the first of its kind in America, would set maximum energy consumption standards for TVs that would be implemented over two years from January 2011. Similar energy requirements have applied for decades to electrical appliances such as refrigerators and air conditioners. The powerful Consumer Electronics Association has argued that such a law would hurt consumers and manufacturers, stifling innovation and effectively taking 25% of sets off the markets. The commission argues that television owners would save around $30 a year per set in reduced energy consumption. The state itself could benefit by as much as $8.1 billion and could drop plans to a new natural gas-fired power station.

Congress is still considering the Cap & Trade bill which by any estimates would cost consumers billions and in some cases more than double utility bills, even as it acts to block expansion of emission-free nuclear power or allow natural gas drilling off shore. Windmill fields filling the oceans are fine, it says. According to the <i>Heritage Foundation</i>, Cap & Trade will cost the 17 towns of one small congressional district in Connecticut alone, over $700 million in 2012. But who cares?

The administration isn’t paying any attention to at all to what anything will cost this nation. Not only will all our grand children be speaking Mandarin in the future, but even if they can breathe clean air, they’ll be doing it in a homeless shelter and wearing a Chinese windbreaker, while watching the Super Bowl on 6-inch TV sets made in Japan.