Green Tech

(Credit: Earth911.com)

Do you know where or how to recycle that old TV or computer? If not, you're not alone.

Around 12 percent more people used the Web site Earth911.com last year than in 2008 to find out how to recycle their used items, according to a report (PDF) released Monday by Earth911.com.

The company offers a searchable database at its Web site where you can type the name of a product like computers or cell phones along with your ZIP code and receive a list of local stores and facilities to drop off those items for recycling.

Among the top 10 products that popped up in searches, computers were number one, followed by batteries, televisions, and compact fluorescent light bulbs. Among the 10 most popular general categories, electronics topped the list.

"Electronics have always been popular searches on Earth911.com, but with the increased attention these devices have received, this past year was our highest yet," said Earth911 President Corey Lambrecht in a statement.

Earth911 said it tracked and compiled the list of search queries at its site using Google Analytics.

Surveys conducted on the Earth911 site last year also peeked into the recycling habits of its visitors. Around 35 percent of the people polled said that money is the main challenge in their efforts to recycle more. But 40 percent said that recyclability is the most important "green" factor when they buy a new product.

Earth911.com provides a list of more than 117,000 facilities and programs to recycle around 240 different items. In addition to its Web site, the company also offers the toll-free number 1-800-CLEANUP and a free iPhone app called iRecycle.

France-based Areva, best known for its work in nuclear power, said on Monday it has acquired concentrating solar-power start-up Ausra for an undisclosed price.

The acquisition will expand Areva's business interests in renewable energy, which already include biomass-based power and development of offshore wind, according to a representative. Areva builds equipment for operating power plants and provides construction and maintenance services, but does not sell electricity to utilities directly, she said.

Ausra's pilot solar-thermal power plant in Australia.

(Credit: Ausra)

"Ausra will bring to Areva proven technology and an experienced management team. And Areva will bring market and financial strength and experience in construction, operations, and maintenance," the representative said.

Areva projects that the market for engineering services around concentrating solar power will expand rapidly this decade, forecasting a 20 percent growth rate and an installed capacity of over 20 gigawatts by 2020.

Silicon Valley-based Ausra is one of several companies formed over the past five years to commercialize concentrating solar-power technology for making electricity at large scale. Ausra's technology, originally developed through academic research in Australia, uses Fresnel lenses to heat a liquid to make steam that powers a turbine to make electricity.

The company, which raised $130 million from high-profile venture capital investors, had originally planned to operate utility-scale solar power plants and sell electricity to utilities. But having found little business, the company last year had to change its business plan to sell equipment for smaller-scale projects and other industries, such as food processing, that use steam.

The acquisition, which is expected to close in the next few months, is a sign that a number of green-technology companies started in the past few years will need to find additional funding or be acquired to scale up or continue their operations.

Because concentrating solar power systems produce steam to make electricity, Areva said that the technology is more closely aligned with its nuclear engineering business than solar photovoltaics, where solar cells convert light to electricity. A representative said the price for the acquisition of Ausra, its first foray into solar, was "in line with recent solar market transactions."

The pairing between Areva and Ausra means that the technology is more likely to be deployed at large scale, as utilities customers and financiers are typically reluctant to work with technology start-ups.

Electric-car services company Better Place has announced deals in Israel with corporate fleet operators and a gas station company, steps toward launching a nationwide network for all-electric cars next year.

Ninety-two companies in Israel plan to host charging stations for Better Place electric cars, the company said Sunday, and a gas station operator will host battery switching stations.

A charging point for electric vehicles in Israel.

(Credit: Better Place)

With the deals in place and support from the Israeli government, Better Place projects that it will be operating a nationwide network of thousands of charging stations by 2011, according to reports.

During a press conference, Israel-born Better Place CEO Shai Agassi predicted that by 2020 there will be more electric cars sold in Israel than gasoline cars. The deal with corporate fleet operators translates into over half the fleet cars in the country, he told Reuters.

Better Place's business model is to provide driving plans for electric vehicle owners, roughly analogous to mobile phone plans. A person or company can purchase a certain number of driving miles per month for a fee and refill batteries at home and at corporate charging stations. They can also swap out batteries, which are owned by Better Place, for fresh ones.

It has signed on Renault Nissan which will manufacture cars with swappable batteries and a driving range of about 100 miles. Earlier this month, Better Place raised $350 million to expand into Israel, Denmark, and other locations--an investment led by bank HSBC.

Better Place has not signed on any other carmakers, and many people have questioned whether its business model will work, particularly in the U.S. where driving distances can be longer than in other countries.

By contrast, its business is better suited for Israel, where there is a strong national interest to reduce oil imports, many people drive corporate cars, and there is a small geography to work within.

Also on Sunday, the company said it will open a demonstration facility, which includes a driving track and displays to explain how how the electric charging network will operate.

(Credit: Oriental)

If you've ever dreamed of sticking all that paperwork on your desk where the sun don't shine, a Japanese machine can turn it all into toilet paper for you.

Appropriately named White Goat, this device designed for the office can take regular letter-size paper or shreds, including that sales report you cursed until you were blue in the face, and transform it into nearly pristine rolls of white tissue.

White Goat was developed by Oriental Co., a small shredder maker based in Kiryu City, north of Tokyo, which says it's the first product of its kind in the world.

As seen in this vid from an ecological-products trade show in Japan last year, White Goat is very simple to use. All the user has to do is supply the machine with electricity, add paper and water, and remove the rolls of toilet paper when they're done. The pulping and rolling processes are automated.

It takes the machine 30 minutes to make one roll, and each roll is made up of about 40 sheets of paper. Oriental, which has applied for a patent on the tech, says White Goat can save about 60 trees annually.

It apparently aims to start selling the Goat this summer for about $100,600. The hefty price tag means it would take years to recoup the cost of toilet paper, but really--what price is too high for the pleasure of wiping your butt with your boss' memos?

(Via ZDNet)

WASHINGTON--More than scientific breakthroughs, the U.S. needs to deploy existing green technologies faster to keep pace with China and other nations, people in the renewable energy industry said this week.

At the Renewable Energy Technology (RETECH) 2010 conference here, the subject of national competitiveness in the burgeoning clean-energy industry was a frequent topic. The concern is that the U.S. is lagging because of wavering policies, complex permitting, and a skittish financial community.

"We're still pretty good at invention or discovery but in terms of deployment, we're losing ground. In fact, you could say we suck," said Mike Davis, the assistant director for energy and environment at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratories, during a session on national lab research. "Our ability to throw sand in the gears in terms of development in this country is just phenomenal. We've perfected it."

There are legitimate reasons to thoroughly review new energy projects, but entrenched business interests are adept at delaying new technology deployment, he said. For example, in a project where Pacific Northwest National Labs worked with Boise Cascade to store air pollution underground, researchers spent one year engineering the technology and five years seeking permits to do tests, Davis said.

Across the U.S., thousands of megawatts' worth of renewable electricity projects are proposed, but there are growing conflicts over land use, including in southwest desert areas suitable for large-scale solar and the offshore wind project in Massachusetts.

On the finance side, many banks shy away from funding first-of-a-kind projects, such as making ethanol from wood chips, because of the potential technology risk, a situation that stunts the growth of new energy companies.

Germany and Spain have become the two largest markets for solar because its energy policies ensure that project developers can get a premium price for renewable power, an approach many U.S. investors and entrepreneurs say is more simple and predictable than the U.S. system.

China, meanwhile, in the past two years has accelerated its energy production dramatically, becoming a powerhouse in solar panel and wind turbine production. This week, the American Wind Energy Association published a report showing that China installed more wind capacity than the U.S. last year for the first time. Through an aggressive government spending program, China is projected to outspend other countries by investing $7.3 billion this year to upgrade its electricity grid with smart meters and other equipment.

"Things are happening in China at a speed that is making our heads spin," said Virginia Sonntag-O'Brien, executive secretary of policy group REN-21, said during a session on Thursday, according to the RETECH conference organizers.

Entrepreneurs' perspective
Picking up the pace of clean-energy project development means that the prices for electricity or fuel from renewable sources will go down faster, green-tech entrepreneurs said. For technology suppliers, stronger demand translates into higher manufacturing volume and more cost-competitive products in a global market.

"While continual innovation in technology can move the needle in terms of costs and acceptance, really it's deployments that drive you down the cost curve. This is what happened in wind, in solar PV (photovoltaics), and we're entering that phase with our solar thermal technology," said Robert Rogan, senior vice president at eSolar, which makes utility-scale solar systems. "You have to build to scale to recognize the full potential. You can't just look at research."

This is eSolar's demonstration plant in Lancaster, Calif.

(Credit: eSolar)

As a company, Pasadena, Calif.-based eSolar is moving from technology development to commercialization, something that many green-tech start-ups are eager to do. The three-year-old company recently announced a giant, 10-year deal to build 2,000 megawatts' worth of solar power in China, following another 1,000-megawatt contract in India.

eSolar also has contracts for 500 megawatts in the U.S. It hopes that a federal plan to streamline permitting on federal land will help get its U.S. project in place in the next year or two, but it still needs to contend with state regulators, Rogan said.

Global race
Specifics aside, people working in clean energy generally argue for consistent policies, which historically has not been the case in the U.S. Having a multiyear policy makes it easier to finance projects, such as biofuel plants or solar farms, since the return is more predictable.

The most recent example of shifting U.S. policy is when the credit for biodiesel production lapsed at the end of last year, which one venture capital investor on Thursday called a "travesty." Not sustaining the subsidy could slow ongoing work in promising algae-based fuels, he said.

In the case of renewable power, the current renewable energy subsidy--a program set up last summer to provide cash grants in lieu of tax credits--is set to expire at the end of 2011. A short-term policy, which may not be renewed, is not "a good fit for a start-up," which needs to attract outside investors to build and install products, said Michael Whalen, the chief financial officer at SolarReserve, another newly formed California solar company.

Like eSolar, SolarReserve is seeking business in the U.S. and abroad. It has two contracts for its molten salt solar storage system, a technology adapted by rocket maker Rocketdyne, in the U.S. and one in Spain. It's in discussions for projects in desert areas in North Africa, Australia, and elsewhere in southern Europe, where the more straightforward subsidies have created large markets for solar, Whalen said.

"We have a real patchwork quilt of policy initiatives that are not particularly coordinated, and each addresses a different part of the puzzle in different fashion," he said.

Regardless of which country can establish the best environment to spur innovation in green technologies, it's clear that the race is global, which is in sharp contrast to the IT revolution, said Stephan Dolezalek, the head of the clean-tech practice at VantagePoint Ventures.

"If renewable is the second coming of the (IT revolution), people are saying, 'I'll be damned if I'll let it happen in Silicon Valley. There's no reason we can't grow these in industries as quickly in Beijing, in India, in the Middle East,'" he said.

Peter Graf.

(Credit: SAP)

What's an enterprise software company doing getting into sustainability? After all, the environmental footprint from software production pales in comparison to resource-intensive industries such as power generation or even running data centers that deliver Web services such as search.

SAP is trying to get ahead of the curve in environmental sustainability strictly for business reasons, according to Peter Graf, who last March was named chief sustainability officer at the Germany-based software heavyweight.

SAP's customers are businesses, which need to comply with regulations, such as reporting greenhouse gas emissions or tracking hazardous substances it may use.

But that's just the beginning. SAP is designing software to manage environmental and social aspects of a business, which can contribute to the bottom line or lower risk, argues Graf. For example, an obvious way to hedge against the volatile price of oil is to use less of it, he says. But that's just one of many natural resources--water, metals, food, energy--that companies can manage more intelligently.

That's where software comes in. Enterprise applications make their mark in business by automating processes such as managing a supply chain. Now, there are tools to manage the natural resources companies use. Last month, SAP released a hosted application called Sustainability Performance Management, a dashboard to track factors such as a company's carbon footprint or water use.

I spoke to Graf about SAP's internal push around sustainability and industry at large.

Q: A lot of companies don't have regulations that force them to lower their carbon footprint or make efficient use of natural resources. So what's the pitch to them for your software?
Graf: The pitch has been evolved through observation after about 100 customer interactions so far. I usually divide people into three categories. The first category are people who ignore the topic as long as they can. They consider having to move when there is a law or a supply chain partner [forces them]. By the way, SAP customers demand information from us so they can continue doing business with us. They want to be sure we have human rights policies, we have an environmental policy--specific requirements. The business case for these people is to comply at the lowest cost and risk.

That's about half the market today. The other part, which is about 45 percent, is who I call the opportunistic guys. They optimize their productivity in terms of resources such as energy, water--any natural resource--because there is price volatility which is dramatic in oil, water, food. That's happening because we are adding 2 billion people who all want their fair access and, since there is only so much that the planet can produce, prices are going up.

The other side of the opportunistic thinking is to think in terms of products. Anything from laundry detergent to electric cars, sustainably produced shoes, anything you can think of. The reason here is that consumers are becoming so much more aware and they are really driving this conversation. They demand accountability, they demand information, they demand that organizations are transparent. And there is a branding aspect to this, which helps attract employees.

The third group are the ones that go about this strategically--I always mention Nike, Coca-Cola, or Nestle. These companies have figured out that if you do not change the way you operate, you're putting your business model at risk. So for SAP, we think we need to change our software because we think it will be harder to sell software systems that don't have sustainability built in them in a comprehensive way. For Nestle, to make very high-quality food they need to have a working planet that's not polluted and there is a reliable supply of natural products. Coca-Cola is very aggressive around water and water protection--the vast majority of the water they use goes into watering sugar cane. Nike, which has a lot of outsourced manufacturing, can't afford to have any irregularities in terms of human rights, because it hurts their brand.

It seems like there's been a higher awareness among consumers about global warming over the past few years. But you're saying that that may not be the biggest motivator for a business to take environmental sustainability seriously.
Graf: Even if a business doesn't necessarily need to be concerned about global warming, [they need to be concerned with the environment]. In principle, a car doesn't need a working planet. Why would a company that produces cars look at [sustainability], apart from the branding issue and the ability to sell a product? Well, [consider] the resources you need to produce that car. Today we put copper cables--and copper prices have really gone through the roof--into the car. Then it comes back, it's crushed, it's melted. And now you have a lot lower-grade steel because there is copper "pollution" in it. The problem is that to retrieve that copper, which gets more and more scarce, the cost is so high.

There's something wrong in the cycle. If you want to produce cars in a hundred years that use copper, you're going to find a way to retrieve that copper. Otherwise we'll be in the landfills not far from today digging out natural resources. Right now, it's a linear chain: we extract stuff from the ground, we go and process it, we consume, and we dispose of it. That's the thing that's concerning people. It needs to be a cycle.

So what's the business case for managing natural resources?
Graf: Right now, it's all about mitigating risk from volatile prices.

So what sort of software have you developed to deal with this?
Graf: Carbon impact is an application that allows an organization to assess and act on information about energy and carbon--how much energy they use globally and what carbon impact comes from that.

That's one of the applications where SAP creates information--just like in an HR system you would have information about attrition, or a financial system would have margin and revenue information. So sustainability is about managing all of this, creating a view where you can look at the entire organization on aspects of social, environmental, and economic impact.

It's about setting targets, it's the monitoring targets, it's about benchmarking against others in the company--plant A versus plant B--and others in your industry, and finally reporting on this information.

Has SAP become more sustainable since you became chief sustainability officer? What have you changed in the process?
Graf: I would absolutely say so. There are a couple of areas. There's a change on the internal side of the house--in other words, what we do ourselves. And there's been a change on the enabler side of the house, which is what we do for our customers.

The most important thing is that we now have a mindset and targets and an understanding of sustainability that is managed and elevated to the strategic level. We used to be tactical in sustainability since 1996.

What's the difference between a strategic and tactical approach to environmental sustainability?
Graf: Tactical is defined as partnering to develop some point solutions, helping people comply with regulations--more the reactive stuff. (SAP bought carbon accounting software company Clear Standards last May.)

When sustainability is part of corporate strategy, you want to have visibility into the business at a level that is much higher than you need to just comply with regulations. You want an ability to manage a performance, report, and predict outcomes. You need to understand the operational elements, extract information, and give people insight and then take action.

I see that many times companies have sustainability going on in the marketing department but not in the operational divisions. As a sustainability officer, I work where value is at a software company, which is the creation of the software. That's really the shift that has happened. I think sustainability officers are best served in this sort of situation. So if you're in a consumer goods company, you should probably have responsibility for product management. If you work in chemicals, you should probably know how energy is used to run your plants.

The Transaction Processing Performance Council has released a new benchmark called TPC-Energy for measuring how much work computers get done for a given amount of energy.

The move reflects the growing concern with power efficiency given environmental issues such as carbon footprint and financial issues involving the cost of electricity for running computers and cooling data centers.

The group already has developed a variety of server benchmarks: TPC-C and the newer TPC-E for database performance and TPC-H for data warehouse performance. TPC-Energy in effect does a little extra math on those tests to yield a "watts per performance" score, the group said in an announcement this week.

TPC has 24 members from the computing industry, including all the major server manufacturers--though with Oracle's acquisition of Sun Microsystems two members are now one.

"In recent years, the number of global server installations has increased exponentially. The amount of energy required to operate, run and cool them has increased to keep pace, and energy consumption is now commonly identified as one of the three most important criteria for IT purchases. Buyers require an objective method of comparing price, performance and energy consumption in order to select equipment that best fits their requirements," said Mike Nikolaiev, chairman of the TPC-Energy committee, in a statement.

Benchmarks are a useful way to compare the value of different systems, although inevitably they tend to emphasize particular workloads and often can be gamed with unrealistic configurations. Another challenge: it can be difficult to get manufacturers to run benchmarks, which particularly in the case of servers can be an expensive, time-consuming undertaking.

The 55-page TPC-Energy report (PDF) is available from the council's Web site.

Utility companies around the world will spend $21 billion by 2015 to improve cybersecurity for the world's electrical smart grid, according to a report released Thursday by Pike Research.

As the industry has increasingly built up smart grids to better control and regulate electrical power, the threat of cyberattacks has become a greater concern. Dangers ranging from terrorist attacks to hackers to accidents to natural disasters could cause substantial damage.

To better safeguard the grid, utilities will spend a total of $21 billion over the next five years. The business segment that services this market will likely see revenue grow to $3.7 billion annually by 2015, compared with $1.2 billion last year, according to the report.

"No utility wants to be the weak link in the chain," said Pike Research managing director Clint Wheelock in a statement. "The concern over grid vulnerability is driving utility technologists to work closely with systems integrators, infrastructure suppliers, and standards bodies to develop a robust framework for smart-grid cybersecurity across multiple domains."

Concerns have been raised for years about the vulnerability of electrical power facilities and systems. As utilities have modernized and moved their equipment and services to the smart grid, those concerns have intensified. Last year, cybersecurity for the smart grid hit the headlines as news surfaced that different groups had tried to hack past the security of the U.S. power grid.

According to an earlier Pike report, it is estimated that $200 billion will be invested overall in the smart grid by 2015.

But challenges remain. To improve communications, utilities have been deploying smart meters that use two-way networks, making them a more vulnerable target for hackers. Networks have also become more integrated, again increasing their vulnerability to a cyberattack.

With many companies involved in the smart grid, there's also a lack of interoperable standards for cybersecurity, noted Pike. To strengthen security, utilities and other players will need end-to-end security technologies that can work across different geographic areas. In response, the U.S. government has called upon the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to develop interoperable standards for smart-grid companies to adopt.

Over the next five years, security spending will probably be heaviest on equipment protection and management. But money will also need to be invested in better securing distribution automation and smart meters.

WASHINGTON--The most well-known obstacles to installing wind turbines are complaints over their visual impact and the potential for bird and bat deaths. But conflict with radar systems have derailed over 9,000 megawatts worth of wind capacity--nearly as much as was installed in the U.S. last year.

(Credit: U.S. Air Force)

"We're not going to put up more wind (in many locations) without conflict because radar systems and wind systems love exactly the same terrain...which is where the wind is at," said Gary Seifert, a program manager for renewable energy technologies at the Idaho National Laboratories, during a presentation at the RETECH conference here on Thursday. "It's really causing a challenge to meeting long-term goals."

The problem is wind farms create "cones of silence" above them, making it difficult for primary radar systems to detect airplanes when they fly over them, Seifert explained. Planes with transponders can communicate with air traffic control towers, but smaller planes don't all have transponders.

Because of radar issues, 2,100 megawatts of wind projects were held up, 5,100 megawatts were deferred, and 2,100 megawatts were abandoned, he said, citing data from a survey done by the American Wind Energy Association. Last year, 10,000 megawatts were installed in the U.S.

Seifert said research could lead to technical fixes to address the problem, including upgrading the software within radar systems to better discern between a spinning turbine blade and an airplane. Turbine blades can also become more "stealthy," or less reflective and detectable by radars systems, he added.

Working with stakeholders early on in a wind development project can also address issues.

But the problem is that it's unclear "who owns the liability of the sky," he said. Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, and the Federal Aviation Administration could all be involved in addressing the situation.

The fear for wind developers is that a delay to study radar-related complications could make a project unprofitable, he said.