Availability of Options

Renewable energy is promising.  After looking into the types of renewable energy, the availability and feasibility of these sources must also be considered.   While most of these sources are still in the developmental stages, it is still important to observe the abundance of the resources throughout the United States in order to determine if enough of a supply exists to satisfy the growing energy appetite.    Also, the location of the resource may actually lead to a regional renewable energy source, versus a national “brand”.  For example, hydroelectric power is already commonly used in the northwest United States, with many hydroelectric dams placed in their rapid rivers.  Also, numerous ethanol pumps are available in the Corn Belt, the same region that is able to abundantly produce the current corn ethanol input.  We will look into the resource distribution of geothermal, wind and solar sources.

Geothermal is not a new resource for renewable energy and has been used to generate electricity since 1904 by an Italian power plant. Utilizing the earth’s own heat to create energy has resulted in geothermal energy to become an available and trustworthy source of energy.  Qualifications for a geothermal site include available water, high temperatures close to the surface, and rock formations to keep the heated water within a controlled area.  Because of the mandatory conditions, geothermal is not a viable option everywhere.  Citing Black & Veatch’s “Renewable Energy Options” again, they provided valuable graphics displaying the availability of geothermal energy across the US.

Another concern regarding resource availability is wind energy.  While traveling to Orlando, Florida last March, the meteorologists warned us of a windy day with gusts up to 15 miles per hour.  Normally, that may qualify as a breeze in South Dakota.  Understandably, different areas receive different winds speeds.  Furthermore, many areas are not suited for wind energy because of dense populations or environmental concerns.  The following chart, also from the Black & Veatch source, accounts all of these factors in displaying the availability of wind energy. Note: South Dakota boasts large potential, while Florida is out of the picture.

Finally, solar energy.  After capture’s the sun’s rays, the energy can be converted into thermal or electrical energy.  Converting the sun’s energy into electrical energy, or solar photovoltaic, is believed to be one of the most environmentally friendly renewable resources since there is minimal noise or emissions.  While solar energy is available across the US, often there is not enough sunlight to meet a large energy demand.  The downfall of solar energy is the immense amount of sunlight needed to obtain copious amounts to meet commercial scale demand.  The southwestern US appears to be the ideal location for such commercial production.

In conclusion, the US energy demand is not one size fits all and our renewable energy options may not be either.  By creating solar systems in California, Utah Arizona and Nevada, wind farms in Texas to North Dakota and Illinois to Montana, and geothermal west of the Mississippi, the United States may be able to capitalize on our diverse renewable energy sources to create a synergy able of decreasing our dependence of foreign energy.

Renewable Resources Reviewed

While ethanol is an often discussed venture in agriculture and energy industries, ethanol is only one of numerous options of renewable energy.  The concept of using non-depleteable resources to meet our energy needs has been around for decades.  The challenge arises in harnessing those renewable resources into viable forms of energy. 

A 2008 publication by Black & Veatch holding company entitled “Renewable Energy Options” breaks down renewable energy into five different forms.  Biomass is the area that ethanol falls under, and includes deriving energy from organic matter.  Geothermal is using the heat extracted from the earth as energy.  Solar energy is harnessed from the sun’s rays.  Water creates energy from its movement, either in ocean waves or rivers.  The final category is wind, which capitalizes on the movement of air. 

There is a common perception that renewable energy sources are more sustainable and environmentally friendly than their fossil fuel counterparts.  However, this is not always the case. For example, clear-cutting a rainforest for biofuels does more harm than it does good.  Only when the renewable resources are gathered in a sustainable way, are these renewable options beneficial.  Furthermore, that is when using renewable energy sources will actually help decrease our overall carbon footprint. 

The Kyoto Protocol was an international agreement to lower carbon emissions for 37 developed countries.  Since the industrialized nations are primarily responsible for the majority of carbon emissions, the responsibility of lowering these emissions is also placed on them.  The Kyoto Protocol was adopted in 1997 in Japan, and the agreeing countries are to report to their carbon emissions to UN Climate Change Secretariat in Bonn, Germany. 

The United States never agreed to the Kyoto Protocol.  Interestingly enough however, the U.S. is the leader in overall renewable-energy use.  The following study gives a numerical breakdown in electrical use. (Note: the study does not reflect using renewable energy for non-electrical uses, like biofuels).  The 2005 global electricity demand was derived from the following sources: 40.2% coal, 19.7% natural gas, 16.4% hydroelectric, 15.1% nuclear, 6.6% petroleum, and 2.1% of non-hydro renewable resources.  Of that 2.1% in other sources, 1.2% comes from biomass, 0.55% wind, 0.31% geothermal, and 0.01% solar (Black & Veatch).  The U.S. demand used more coal (49.7%) and nuclear (19.3%), similar natural gas (19.1%) and non-hydro renewable (2.3%), and less hydroelectric (6.5%) and petroleum (3%).  

Following the U.S. in renewable energy use are Germany, Denmark, and Spain.  Germany is currently the world leader in solar energy.  Germany is located in the northern part of the northern hemisphere, so the abundant use of solar power in their country may not be intuitively explained by their geography.  Similar to the United State’s subsidies for the ethanol industry, Germany leads the way in solar energy because of their high solar subsides, not because of the strength of sun they receive. 

The Black & Veatch report concludes that the development of renewable energy is a result from the high government programs, not the actual abundance of the energy sources, or any other economic factor.  Time will tell of the current structure will be beneficial in utilizing biomass, geothermal, solar, water, and wind to meet the growing energy needs of the growing world population. 

Corn Ethanol Concerns

Last week’s blog covered possible options regarding different sources for ethanol production.  This week, the current use of corn ethanol will be discussed.  According to the U.S. Department of Energy, half of the gasoline sold in the United States last year contained ten percent ethanol.  Ethanol is advocated as a cleaner fuel than burning straight gasoline, helping meet the clean air standards that were federally mandated several years ago.  The ethanol use in current vehicles is enough to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, especially carbon monoxide emissions, by 30 percent of standard gasoline emissions.

Some limiting factors regarding the current use of ethanol in the United States is the location of E85 vehicles (vehicles designed to use a blended fuel containing 85 percent ethanol), also known as flex fuel vehicles.  There are currently 8 million flex-fuel vehicles on the road, while most of the fuel stations offering E85 fuel are located in the Midwest, especially in the U.S. Corn Belt.  The concentrated location of the E85 fuel limits the ability for the flex-fuel vehicle to take advantage of the cleaner fuel choice, ethanol.  This helps explain the limited about of information regarding the effects of ethanol on a vehicles engine, especially any long term costs or benefits from ethanol use. 

Currently most subsidies are received by ethanol producers, in an effort to provide incentives to invest in this alternative energy source. Retailers and distributors would like to see these subsidies expanded to them as well, with the intention of minimizing the costs associated with offering ethanol products.   Increasing subsidies to more stages of the production and distribution chain would help bring more E85 pumps to areas with an abundance of flex-fuel vehicles.  With the increased access, there would be more opportunity data available on the actual wear and tear resulting from ethanol use.

 Subsidies are just one of the tools that governments implement to encourage specific behaviors.  The United State is looking at developing more renewable energy sources, and U.S. taxpayers are paying the price for this technology to be developed.    While providing subsidies to encourage ethanol production and research are current trends, thorough analysis of the industry is still needed.  Consequently, subsidizing ethanol is not a long run equilibrium, and many are wondering if the current corn ethanol will ever be self-sustainable without government support. 

A Cornell professor, named David Pimental, studied the energy efficiency of our current ethanol production system.  According to his results, a gallon of ethanol produces 77,000 BTU of energy.  However, the amount it takes to actually produce a gallon of corn ethanol is 131,000 BTU of energy.  With a negative net energy return, corn ethanol does not appear to hold much promise for future energy independence.  The same article estimates that 11 acres of corn would be needed to fuel a single vehicle for an entire year, the same amount of acres that would feed 7 people (Business Ethics, June 2010).

With increased data regarding ethanol production, there will be time spent looking into developing systems for other sources, like those mentioned in last week’s post.  Until then, the U.S. will have to decide if the cost of valuable tax-dollars is worth the investment into corn ethanol.