YINCHUAN - Oil-rich countries in the Middle East that plan to boost clean energy development are expecting Chinese firms to grasp opportunities in the regional market.
With increasing domestic energy demand, the Egyptian government is pushing for diversified energy consumption, said Mahmoud Mustafa, a senior official in charge of new energy projects with Egypt's Ministry of Electricity and Energy.
By 2020, electricity generated by renewable resources will account for 20 percent of the country's total, including 12 percent from wind power and 8 percent from solar energy, said Mustafa, during the China-Arab States Expo held in northwest China's Ningxia Hui autonomous region from September 15 to 19.
"China has accumulated much successful experience in the renewable energy sector. We hope Chinese companies will visit Egypt's renewable energy projects and establish joint ventures and exchange experiences," said the Egyptian official.
Saudi Arabia, one of the world's leading oil producers and exporters, also eyes solar power development.
By 2032, solar power will account for one third of Saudi's total electricity generation with the solar panel market worth more than 100 billion U.S. dollars in the next 20 years, according to Khalid Halawani, commercial counselor of the Saudi Embassy in Beijing.
Saudi Arabia is the biggest trade partner of China in West Asia and Africa, but 70 percent of trade is oil, according to Halawani. He hopes the two countries will strengthen cooperation in the new energy sector with investment from big Chinese companies.
New energy has become an important development sector for other Arab countries such as the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar and Jordan.
Renewable energy is a new field in Sino-Arab cooperation, given the importance attached to the sector, especially solar and wind power by Arab countries, said Han Wenke, director of the Energy Research Institute of China's National Development and Reform Commission.
The International Renewable Energy Agency, an inter-governmental organization devoted to a sustainable energy future, is headquartered in Abu Dhabi in the UAE.
The Middle East has rich sunlight resources and some countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE have supporting policies for solar energy, said Zhang Hao, deputy general manager of Yingli Green Energy, a leading Chinese solar panel manufacturer.
Some Chinese solar panel companies have already tapped into the Middle East market with good sales of their products.
Replacing fuel-generated power with solar energy will be a trend in the Middle East, according to Zhang.
Zhang said his company faces a sharp drop in sales from Europe and the United States due to anti-dumping moves, but will see an increase in the Middle East, the Caribbean, Africa and South America.
you missed the most crucial point GREEN IS THE FUTURE The United States of America and the People's Republic of China recognize that the increasing dangers presented by climate change measured against the inadequacy of the global response requires a more focused and urgent initiative. The two sides have been engaged in constructive discussions through various channels over several years bilaterally and multilaterally, including the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change process and the Major Economies Forum. In addition, both sides consider that the overwhelming scientific consensus regarding climate change constitutes a compelling call to action crucial to having a global impact on climate change.
The two countries took special note of the overwhelming scientific consensus about anthropogenic climate change and its worsening impacts, including the sharp rise in global average temperatures over the past century, the alarming acidification of our oceans, the rapid loss of Arctic sea ice, and the striking incidence of extreme weather events occurring all over the world. Both sides recognize that, given the latest scientific understanding of accelerating climate change and the urgent need to intensify global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, forceful, nationally appropriate action by the United States and China - including large-scale cooperative action - is more critical than ever. Such action is crucial both to contain climate change and to set the kind of powerful example that can inspire the world.
news coming out of China that Trina solar is in negotiation with SunTech buying their core technology .
that's why probably TSL has spiked this morning.
All these upgrades are the results of their humiliation knowing that China Could alone digest the what so-called global overcapacity of solar panels by itself. Now they are coming forward making these recommendations so they could hide their past dirty tricks.
remember Gordon Johnson? He actually said that fslr was on the verge of bankruptcy less than a year ago.
tsl Aug 21, 2013 Ardour Capital Upgrade Hold to Buy
Aug 20, 2013 Maxim Group Upgrade Hold to Buy
Aug 20, 2013 Ardour Capital Upgrade Hold to Buy
Jan 17, 2013 Nomura Upgrade Neutral to buy
Citi raised their 12-month target price for Trina Solar (TSL) from $5 to $11.50
As the temperature rises, so does the need for electricity, primarily to fuel the air conditioners so many of us love to crank up as the weather heats up.
Most regions of the U.S. have plenty of generation capacity to meet the requirements of blasting ACs. And then there’s Texas, and to a lesser extent, Southern California.
Texas’ electricity reserves are expected to be below target levels for a second year straight, while California could face concerns if there are extreme weather events, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
In Texas, the grid operator will have a reserve margin of 12.88, percent according to North American Electric Reliability Corporation's 2013 Summer Short-Term Reliability Assessment, lower than the 13.75 percent target for the state’s grid operator, ERCOT.
ERCOT got a little lucky last year, with a relatively mild summer. But if luck doesn’t strike twice, Texas could be faced with emergency alerts and some very high prices, as the cap on prices for the days of peak electricity use has been raised significantly this year.
The high prices are meant to incent new generation, but generation takes years to build. Texas is also badly in need of robust demand response programs, but it has been a slow slog to make enough changes to the market to bring significant load -- especially from the homes that drive summer peaks -- into demand response programs.
In Southern California, the situation is less dire but not ideal. The region is relying on imported energy because of the prolonged outage of the San Onofre Nuclear Generation Station (SONGS) that will now be closed for good. Unlike Texas, however, Southern California has met the constraints with “significant refinements” to demand response programs, according to the NERC report, as well as installing more capacity resources. But now that the Associated Press is reporting the plant’s operator, Southern California Edison, is permanently closing the troubled nuclear plant, Southern California will have to find other ways to replace the 2,200 megawatts that SONGS provided.
Renewable energy will help to some degree, especially in Southern California. In the Western Interconnection, more than 1,700 megawatts of new solar capacity was added in 2012, nearly three times the amount included from the summer before.
The Tesla of Garbage Trucks Could Clean Up Urban Air
Last month I learned how to drive a delivery truck. Not because I’m considering a career change, but because I had the opportunity to test out an innovative new truck technology that could help improve urban air quality. It’s a retrofit for medium-duty trucks (such as delivery trucks and garbage trucks) that can improve fuel efficiency and reduce smog and particle emissions by 90 percent.
Although we’re making great strides in improving fuel efficiency and cutting pollution from cars and light-duty trucks, like pickups, cleaning up bigger--and let’s face it, less exciting--vehicles like delivery trucks has lagged behind. But now there’s a bit of glamor behind clean truck technology. The retrofit I tested was developed by a small California company called Wrightspeed. Its CEO, engineer Ian Wright, is one of the original co-founders of Tesla Motors. The electric Tesla Model S recently received a near-perfect score from Consumer Reports (the highest they’ve ever awarded), and its first quarter 2012 sales topped the large luxury sedan market—if Wright can achieve similar success with his truck retrofits, we might all breathe a little easier.
There are about 2 million of these workhorse trucks on American roads today, delivering packages, hauling waste, or helping move furniture. They consume more than ten times as much fuel, annually, as the average car, and most of them run on diesel, spewing out toxic soot from their tailpipes. When these trucks rumble through congested urban streets, where there’s lots of foot traffic, and kids playing right at tailpipe level, they’re a clear health hazard. Diesel pollution can cause asthma, cancer, cardiovascular disease, and other illnesses. Nearly 37 million kids in this country live in areas where the air is unhealthy due to smog and soot pollution from diesel and other fossil fuels. Diesel pollution is also a major source of black carbon, which was recently determined to be the second largest global warming pollutant.
Wrightspeed’s technology essentially converts a groaning, squealing, gas-guzzling truck into a cleaner, quieter, long-range, plug-in hybrid vehicle. The retrofit powertrain uses batteries to drive electric motors coupled to the wheels--more efficient than using a gas engine to power the wheels. The batteries have a range of about 40 miles, and can be charged from the grid, just as in a plug-in electric vehicle, such as a Chevy Volt. Unlike a full EV, however, the batteries are recharged by an on-board generator, a microturbine that runs on gasoline, or diesel, or CNG. This makes the truck’s range effectively unlimited, since it can be refueled at a regular gas station. It’s kind of the best of both worlds, with the additional advantage of being a retrofit--it doesn’t require the purchase of an entirely new vehicle.
With help from a grant awarded by the California Energy Commission (CEC), which helps provide critical government support for promising clean technologies, as well as private capital, Wrightspeed was able to manufacture prototypes and test them on the Isuzu NPR, a popular model in the medium-duty truck fleet. Under testing conditions, the normal truck averaged about 12 miles per gallon. With the hybrid drivetrain, the truck earned about 44 miles per gallon. Wrightspeed calculated that on a diesel-powered garbage truck, emissions of smog-forming pollutants such as NOx and small particles would be reduced 85 to 95 percent—and that’s based on a conservative estimate of the truck’s baseline pollution levels. (Garbage trucks, as you can imagine, rarely cruise smoothly down city streets, and their emissions jump with every grinding stop and roaring start.)
The company won another CEC grant to help accelerate manufacturing of its hybrid drivetrain. The prototype is already in trials with potential customers, and the market potential is strong. Trucks last a long time, but drivetrains do not, and fleet owners are used to replacing their vehicle’s drivetrains every few years. A retrofit is a much easier sell than a new hybrid vehicle. Plus, because of the fuel savings, a retrofit pays for itself in just about 5 years.
The trucks that Wrightspeed is targeting comprise about 20 percent of the U.S. truck fleet. If this retrofit is adopted widely—and with its attractive payback time, it just might—we’re looking at taking out a significant chunk of air pollution from our cities.
This post originally appeared in GOOD.
AMERICA’S unexpected, and most welcome, bonanza of natural gas from its vast shale deposits seems to be doing as much to reduce pollution as many of the efforts introduced over the years to restrict emissions from vehicles, power stations and other sources. The biggest breakthrough the energy industry has seen in decades, hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) combined with horizontal drilling, has released unprecedented quantities of gas from this shale. As a consequence, the spot price of domestically produced natural gas has tumbled from a high of over $12 per million British Thermal Units in 2008 to less than $2 in 2012, before settling at around $4 today (a million BTUs is roughly equivalent to a gigajoule of energy).
Increasing use of this cheap, clean gas means power stations across the country have reduced their carbon dioxide emissions to levels not seen since 1992—despite serving a population that has grown by almost a quarter since then. On a per capita basis, carbon dioxide emissions from power stations are now at their lowest since President Eisenhower left office in 1961.
This is because, when purged of impurities, natural gas (which is more or less pure methane) is the cleanest fossil fuel around. It produces 30% less carbon dioxide per unit of heat than petrol does, and 45% less than coal. Conventional coal-fired power stations churn out 900kg (1,980 pounds) of the gas for every megawatt-hour of electricity they generate. Natural-gas plants emit little more than half that amount.
Given such remarkably cheap natural gas, the outlook for coal is dire. On average, coal-fired power stations still produce the cheapest electricity. And between them, they still account for 37% of the electricity generated in America (compared with 30% from natural gas, 19% from uranium, 7% from hydro, 5% from renewables and 1% from oil). But coal-fired stations, with their belching smokestacks, are notorious polluters, and face tough new air-quality standards that will render many older ones uneconomic.
At present, natural-gas plants have lower operating costs than only 9% of coal-fired stations. But the tougher emission standards proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will make natural-gas plants as economically attractive as 65% of existing coal-fired stations, according to researchers at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.
The EPA’s more stringent standards include lower emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, soot and mercury. At present, natural-gas plants produce only one class of emission—nitrogen oxides—that exceeds the new EPA thresholds. Many coal-fired plants exceed all the proposed thresholds, says Lincoln Pratson, leader of the study team at Duke. That will make it more expensive—prohibitively so, in many cases—for them to comply.
Industry has got the message. A year ago, Southern Company of Atlanta, Georgia, long one of America’s biggest operators of coal-fired power stations, generated more electricity from natural gas than it did from coal. In 2010, power-plant owners across America announced plans to retire over 40 gigawatts—roughly 12%—of their coal-fired capacity in favour of natural gas.
As the transition to gas gathers pace, the need for a more comprehensive network of pipelines and storage facilities has become apparent. Such infrastructure would also assist a second—and in some ways more radical—shift in the way gas is used. For it may be the future of road transport, too.
American commercial vehicles already use a lot of natural gas. For several decades now, local-delivery vans, buses and rubbish collectors, which rarely stray far from their refuelling stations and operate mainly within towns, have been switching to compressed natural gas (CNG) to lower fuel costs and to minimise their impact on the environment. Long-distance hauliers would do likewise if there were more highway filling stations with CNG pumps. All of which is encouraging for natural-gas producers. But for real change to happen, private motorists will have to follow suit.
They might be tempted. At an equivalent in energy terms of around $2.20 a US gallon, CNG costs a little over half what Americans pay for petrol. But making the change is not easy.
First, only one car model designed to run on CNG, the Honda Civic GX, is currently available in America. And it is not cheap. The basic model costs $26,300 compared with $18,200 for a comparable petrol-engined Civic.The two models have similar fuel economy (31-32 mpg—ie, 7.6-7.4 litres/100km—on the combined city/highway cycle), but the GX is nowhere near as spritely as its petrol-powered twin.
Second, enthusiasts wishing to retrofit existing vehicles to burn the stuff face enormous hurdles. Kits to do so cost anything from $12,000 to $18,000, and have to be installed by a licensed technician. That is because it is illegal in America for private individuals to tamper with a vehicle’s emission system—which is what has to be done to enable a petrol or a diesel engine to run on natural gas.
Third, it is not just the up-front cost that puts many motorists off CNG. The paucity of filling stations is an even bigger deterrent. America has around 600 natural-gas stations open to the public, compared with 118,000 petrol stations. The Honda GX’s pressurised natural-gas tank (holding the energy equivalent of an eight-gallon petrol tank) is good for about 240 miles (380km). Trips out of town have therefore to be planned strategically, via CNG filling stations spaced few and far between.
This third objection could be overcome if CNG vehicles were hybrids, able to run on petrol as well as natural gas. That is one of the goals of America’s Natural Gas Alliance (ANGA), a trade group in Washington, DC. ANGA has had popular models from half a dozen manufacturers, including BMW, Ford, Chrysler and General Motors, retrofitted to run on both fuels. A number of these “bi-fuel” demonstrators were previewed at a Southern California Gas facility in Los Angeles on May 21st. To drum up further interest, the trade group intends to introduce its bi-fuel lineup to the wider public at events around the country over coming months.
Which fuel actually will power the car of the future is up for grabs. A century ago, lead-acid batteries and even steam engines vied with diesel and petrol as serious alternatives in the emerging automobile industry. Now lithium-ion batteries, hydrogen-powered fuel cells and methanol, as well as methane, are queuing up to take on the older fossil-fuel contenders. Two things are clear, though: there is a lot of natural gas out there; and it is extremely cheap. In both electricity generation and road transport, it will be a hard act to beat.
Here are a few important efficiency stories flying under the radar.
This week has seen three big wins for energy efficiency, all of which have slipped largely under the radar.
First, Ohio ratepayers have reaped huge benefits from FirstEnergy bidding efficiency into the most recent PJM capacity auction, netting an expected $28 million over the four-year period where payments are available.
Next, the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy released a new analysis finding that energy efficiency could save $4.2 billion in energy costs while creating $3 billion in economic output.
Last, but certainly not least, the American Gas Associated found that more than 40 gigawatts of combined heat-and-power (CHP) potential has a payback of less than ten years.
Ohio saves big bucks
Ohio ratepayers and regulators knew that statewide energy efficiency programs had to be cost-effective to be enacted, which is accomplished by paying off the capital investments through reduced energy consumption. A pleasant bonus, according to exclusive analysis from Sierra Club, is that First Energy’s efficiency credits, totaling around 165 megawatts, have yielded new revenues of about $6.9 million per year for four years.
This contributes to offsetting program costs beyond the $4 these investments saved to every $1 spent. As Daniel Sawmiller, Senior Campaign Representative at the Sierra Club, explained, “This auction turns energy efficiency into a commodity that can be bought and sold like other forms of energy. It’s a clean and inexpensive energy resource that creates downward pressure on electricity prices for everybody. We should be doing everything we can to maximize our energy efficiency and promote the lower prices and economic growth that go with it.”
Efficiency directly saves consumers money on their monthly bills when they use less energy, but also indirectly with lower clearing prices in the capacity auction. Capacity auctions are less obvious, but equally important.
Move over lakes and gophers, Minnesota is going solar.
Yesterday the Minnesota legislature passed a substantial solar energy bill that will result in the development of more than 450 megawatts of solar by 2020. Solar advocates are awaiting Governor Dayton’s signature which, given his support for solar, is expected shortly.
This bill represents one of the most significant solar victories of the 2013 legislative session. Fresh Energy, Sierra Club, MNSEIA, and many other organizations worked to pass this bill and kick-start a solar economy in their state.
The bill contains so many smart new solar policies, we recommend a full read. Below we highlight some of the most exciting parts of the legislation:
1.5 percent Solar Energy RES Requirement
Investor-owned utilities (IOUs) must generate at least 1.5 percent of their total electric retail sales from solar sources by the end of 2020. Municipally owned utilities and rural electric coops do not have to comply with the 1.5 percent solar requirement.
At least 10 percent of the new solar standard must be met by solar energy generated from solar devices of 20 kilowatts or less. The systems will be incentivized through a $5 million per year fund for the next 5 years. The incentives will be production-based, with a 10 year payment stream.
In addition to the 1.5 percent requirement, the bill includes language stating that it is a state energy goal (not mandatory) to get to 10 percent solar by 2030. However, the investor-owned utilities were able to get a provision in the bill that states that utilities can petition the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to cap the total amount of net metered projects in their service district when it reaches 4 percent of gross sales. (Note that this cap does not apply to VOST projects, and the cap only applies to IOUs.)
“Made in MN” Solar Module Incentives
The bill authorizes additional production-based incentives for systems that use “Made in Minnesota” solar modules. Payments will
Sentiment: Strong Buy
rom the battlefield to stateside bases, the U.S. military has proven that solar is reliable.
READ SOMETHING USEFUL and know what is the facts beyond solar surge
The Army, Navy and Air Force are using more than 130 megawatts of solar for everything from powering remote special operations to air conditioning and lighting for U.S. base residences. And the forces intend to keep building toward 3 gigawatts of solar capacity by 2025 as part of a much bigger Department of Defense (DOD) commitment.
While detractors were declaring solar too intermittent to be reliable at home, U.S. Marines were successfully relying on it at battlefield sites in the Khyber Pass, according to Enlisting the Sun: Powering the U.S. Military with Solar Energy, a new report from the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), released just in time for Armed Forces Day on May 18.
The DOD’s annual $20 billion energy budget makes it the biggest single energy consumer in the world.
USC 2911 of DOD’s title 10 Energy Performance Goals, as updated in 2009, requires 25 percent of total military facility energy consumption to come from renewable energy sources by 2025.
Driven by that target, the Navy has installed more than 58 megawatts at or near bases in Washington, D.C. and twelve states. It has plans to exceed the basic plan by obtaining 50 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2025. Its plans call for 57 percent of its new renewables to be from photovoltaic (PV) solar through 2017.
The Air Force, the military’s biggest energy consumer, has built 38 megawatts of solar capacity operating in 24 states. It will procure 1 gigawatt of renewables by 2016. The plan is for PV to be more than 70 percent of all new Air Force renewable capacity through 2017.
The Army has installed over 36 megawatts of solar installed at bases in sixteen states on its way to procuring 1 gigawatt of renewable capacity. Solar will account for one-third of the Army’s planned renewabl
Published: Thursday, 16 May 2013 | 12:41 PM ET
By: Bill Briggs, NBC News contributor
American eaters, let's talk about the birds and the bees: The U.S. food supply—from chickens injected with arsenic to dying bee colonies—is under unprecedented siege from a blitz of man-made hazards, meaning some of your favorite treats someday may vanish from your plate, experts say.
Warmer and moister air ringing much of the planet—punctuated by droughts in other locales—is threatening the prime ingredients in many daily meals, including the maple syrup on your morning pancakes and the salmon on your evening grill as well as the wine in your glass and the chocolate on your dessert tray, according to four recent studies.
At the same time, an unappetizing bacterial outbreak in Florida citrus droves, largely affecting orange trees, is causing fruit to turn bitter. Elsewhere, unappealing fungi strains are curtailing certain coffee yields and devastating some banana plantations, researchers report.
Now, mix in the atmospheric misfortunes sapping two mainstays of American farming—corn and cows. Heavier than normal spring rains have put the corn crop far behind schedule: Only 28 percent of corn fields have been planted this year compared with 85 percent at this time in 2012, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Meanwhile, drought in the Southeastern plains and a poor hay yield have culled the U.S. cattle and calf herd to its lowest level since 1952, propelling the wholesale price of a USDA cut of choice beef to a new high on May 3—$201.68 per 100 pounds, eclipsing the old mark of $201.18 from October 2003, the USDA reports.
(Read More: Next Group That May Be Slammed by Debt: Farmers)
"We are in the midst of dramatic assault on the security of the food supply," said Dr. Robert S. Lawrence, director of the Center for a Livable Future, part of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. The group promotes ecological research into the nexus of diet, food production, environment and human health.
The primary culprit of all this menu mayhem is climate change, which is choking off certain crops already weakened by both genetic tinkering and chemically based farming, some experts contend.
Agricultural history is, of course, laced with tales of crop-munching bug swarms and dirt-baking droughts, leading to famous regional famines. Paleontologists have even argued that the hanging gardens of ancient Babylon dried up because people messed with that micro-climate by slashing too many trees, over-expanding farm fields and exhausting the water supply, Lawrence said.
More From NBC News:
Sentiment: Strong Buy
SPWR panels are customers #1 best choice. All installers are using spwr.
For example, when I was installing my panels, I shopped around with so many installers.
They had to indicate my choices of panel and names of the companies. I choosed spwr.
And the respond from them was, that's everybody's favorite and our number one seller.
Sentiment: Strong Buy