Skip to main content

In the interest of keeping Kossacks informed about environmental advances around the world, here's another diary of recent climate change news down under. Most of the good news is from New Zealand and the bad from Australia in this edition.

In this diary:

  • Cheaper solar from dyes
  • US investment in ethanol from steel mill waste
  • Howard refuses climate change action
  • Australians pray for rain


CHEAPER SOLAR FROM DYES

A breakthrough announcement on an alternative to expensive silicon-based solar panels, from a University that is getting a great reputation for its energy efficiency research:

Massey Uni. Press Release:

Taking nature's cue for cheaper solar power
Press Release, 4 April

Solar cell technology developed by the University’s Nanomaterials Research Centre will enable New Zealanders to generate electricity from sunlight at a tenth of the cost of current silicon-based photo-electric solar cells.

Dr Wayne Campbell and researchers in the centre have developed a range of coloured dyes for use in dye-sensitised solar cells.

...

Dr Campbell says that unlike the silicon-based solar cells currently on the market, the 10x10cm green demonstration cells generate enough electricity to run a small fan in low-light conditions -- making them ideal for cloudy weather. The dyes can also be incorporated into tinted windows that trap to generate electricity.

He says the green solar cells are more environmentally friendly than silicon-based cells as they are made from titanium dioxide -- a plentiful, renewable and non-toxic white mineral obtained from New Zealand’s black sand. Titanium dioxide is already used in consumer products such as toothpaste, white paints and cosmetics.

"The refining of pure silicon, although a very abundant mineral, is energy-hungry and very expensive. And whereas silicon cells need direct sunlight to operate efficiently, these cells will work efficiently in low diffuse light conditions," Dr Campbell says.

"The expected cost is one tenth of the price of a silicon-based solar panel, making them more attractive and accessible to home-owners."

Manawatu Standard:

New solar cells developed by Massey University don't need direct sunlight to operate and use a patented range of dyes that can be impregnated in roofs, window glass and eventually even clothing to produce power.

This means teenagers could one day be wearing jackets that will recharge their equivalents of cellphones, iPods and other battery- driven devices.

The breakthrough is a development of the university's Nanomaterials Research Centre and has attracted world-wide interest already - particularly from Australia and Japan.

...

"We now have the most efficient porphyrin dye in the world," said the centre's director, Ashton Partridge.

"It is the most efficient ever made. While others are doing related work, in this aspect we are the world leaders."

The use of dyes is not in itself new, but the main drawback of this approach until now has been efficiency. The Massey team seem convinced they have made a major advance in that area.

This research sounds very promising, as it addresses some major obstacles that solar power currently faces: construction costs, raw material costs, and the envronmental effects of photovoltaic panel construction. I'll be watching this for future progress.


U.S. INVESTMENT IN ETHANOL FROM STEEL MILL WASTE

This one made the New York Times:

Carbon Gas Is Explored as a Source of Ethanol

By LAWRENCE M. FISHER

Published: April 24, 2007

SAN FRANCISCO, April 23 -- A New Zealand company said Monday that it had secured financing from an investor in Silicon Valley to produce ethanol from an untapped source -- carbon monoxide gas.

The company, LanzaTech, based in Auckland, said it had developed a fermentation process in which bacteria consume carbon monoxide and produce ethanol. Ethanol can be used as an alternative fuel or an octane-boosting, pollution-reducing additive to gasoline.

Sean Simpson, LanzaTech’s co-founder and chief scientific officer, said the company would use the $3.5 million investment from the venture firm, Khosla Ventures, to establish a pilot plant and perform the engineering work to prepare for commercial-scale ethanol production.

Vinod Khosla, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems who formed Khosla Ventures in 2004, has invested in more than a dozen start-ups involved in "clean fuel" technologies. He said in a telephone interview that LanzaTech stood out from the scores of proposals he sees each day for both its ability to scale up to industrial proportions and the credibility of the company’s founding scientists. ... He said his firm "sent the best process engineers we know to evaluate the technology and could it be industrialized, and the answer was yes."

TVNZ:

LanzaTech is working on a process to turn waste carbon monoxide into ethanol and has secured $4.7 million from Khosla Ventures, led by Vinod Khosla, a co-founder of Sun Microsystems.

Energy Minister David Parker says the potential for this kind of research is huge.

"These researchers estimate their technology could produce 50 billion gallons (190 billion litres) of ethanol from the world's steel mills alone by turning unwanted emissions into useful fuel. This is exactly the kind of new technology we need to make a difference to world's security of energy supply and to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change."

I was surprised to see that make the New York Times, as it's not exactly a huge amount of investment. It will be interesting to see how this progresses.


HOWARD REFUSES CLIMATE CHANGE ACTION

Facing reelection later this year, Australian Prime Minister John Howard has begun a startling media rampage downplaying Australia's role in climate change, using stronger rhetoric than ever before and being so skeptical as to almost be a complete global warming denier.

Sydney Morning Herald:

Climate not main challenge: PM
April 23, 2007

... Mr Howard said Australia was a minor emitter of greenhouse gases and could not influence the global climate by acting alone.

[Selected quotes from John Howard in the article follow]

"Do we need to lower carbon emissions over time? Of course we do. But to say that climate change is the overwhelming moral challenge for this generation of Australians is misguided at best and misleading at worst. It de-legitimises other challenges over which we do have significant and immediate control."

"At the same time we know that independent action by Australia will not materially affect our climate. Australia emits fewer greenhouse gases in a year than the United States and China emit in a month."

"As the Productivity Council has warned, there are potentially very serious costs to Australia from acting alone."

"I will not sub-contract our climate change policy to the European Union."

"It is technological progress funded by economic growth that holds the key to environmental progress."

He downplayed the role of renewable energies, saying they could not take the place of fossil fuels and nuclear power in energy generation. "It will be a contribution at the margin," of the renewable sector, he said.

All that was said the day after Earth Day. Sounds like someone forgot his meds that morning!

It's interesting how often he talks about the dangers of Australia acting alone. The irony appears to be lost on Mr Howard, that acting alone is precisely what Australia is doing now. He wants to pretend that running a country with only 20 million people allows his government to ignore global warming and let Europe and the larger (by population) nations bear the costs of climate change action. He has even called his opponents "zealots" simply for proposing achieveable emission cuts. Temper, Mr Howard, temper!

This tantrum against science has earned him a rebuttal from the CSIRO -- which is still the nation's top scientific body despite dwindling funding and attempted gagging of scientists on climate change issues under Howard's decade as Prime Minister.

The Australian:

CSIRO contradicts Howard over climate action
April 25, 2007

BIG greenhouse emissions cuts are affordable and achievable, the CSIRO says, contradicting statements from Prime Minister John Howard yesterday that put economic prosperity ahead of reducing emissions.

An official CSIRO submission to Mr Howard's emissions trading task group last month said most international studies now showed developed countries would need to slash emissions by 60 to 90 per cent by 2050 to avoid "dangerous levels of climate interference", Fairfax newspapers reported today.

...

The Greens yesterday set goals of a 30 per cent cut in emissions by 2020 and 80 per cent by 2050, while Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd has committed Labor to 60 per cent by 2050.

...

[Mr Howard said,] "I think it is crazy and irresponsible of any political party in this country to commit to a target when you don't know."

He calls the Green and Labor politicians crazy and irresponsible? Australia relies on coal for most of its electricity generation and uses far more coal per person than any other developed or developing nation. The response of John Howard's government has been to promise mining companies the status quo, and announce a plan to phase out incandescent bulbs. It's simply not good enough. Australia needs to make huge emission cuts, and is capable -- the nation has amongst the best natural resources for wind and solar power in the world.


AUSTRALIANS PRAY FOR RAIN

Whenever he has not been verbally attacking every person in Australia who dares to suggest the scientists who have formed overwhelming consensus on global warming might actually be right, John Howard has recently made public calls for Australians to pray for rain.

The Australian:

Pray for rain, says Howard
April 22, 2007

PRIME Minister John Howard has urged Australians to pray for rain as hard-hit agricultural regions face zero water allocations due to drought.
Mr Howard warned last week that farmers in the Murray-Darling Basin faced having no water for the coming irrigation year unless heavy rain fell in the next six to eight weeks.

Today, he said he intended to meet irrigators over coming weeks to discuss the grim situation. Meanwhile, he encouraged people to seek divine intervention.

...

"So we should all, literally and without any irony, pray for rain over the next six to eight weeks."

The Murray-Darling basin contains 70% of Australia's irrigation resources, and produces 40% of the nation's food. Years of drought have brought about crisis conditions, with massive food price increases and electricity shortages (Australia actually gets a small amount from hydro, amongst all their coal plants) expected if there is no significant rain soon. Some scientists called the 2006 drought a "once in a thousand years" event, but so far 2007 is even worse. Like in so many other places around the world, global warming in Australia is making phrases like "once in a thousand years" outdated and fanciful. Extremes that were once every ten or twenty years, are now happening almost every year.

Finally, other brief news: New Zealand's largest city Auckland is tipped to get an additional 30 US cents per gallon gasoline tax, on top of the existing gas taxes that apply across the country. The new gas tax revenue may go towards electrification of trains (good) and completing motorways (not so good). It will be interesting to see if this happens, and where the money is spent. New Zealand has an extremely high per capita car use (probably second in the OECD only to the USA) and transport accounts for 41% of NZ total energy use, which is much higher than comparable developed nations -- so measures to reduce car use are the nation's highest climate change priority.

If you read this far, I hope you found something of interest. Later...

Originally posted to retrograde on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:01 PM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Excellent. We may be able to afford solar PV soon (5+ / 0-)

    Solicit.Agreement.First.

    by ormondotvos on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:10:15 PM PDT

  •  Good on You, Mate (5+ / 0-)

    Thanks for the news.

    The grandchildren of a close friend live in the Murray-Darling basin.  It sounds really dire Down Under.

    I've read that Australian bees are also having troubles.  Not Colony Collapse Disorder but encroaching infections from Asian bees.  Oh well.

    Solar is civil defense. Video of my small scale solar experiments at http://solarray.blogspot.com/2006/03/solar-video.html

    by gmoke on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:25:43 PM PDT

  •  cheap solar (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SarahLee, retrograde, Winnie

    would be wonderful! That's great news.

    Rec'd.

    humani nil a me alienum puto (I consider nothing human foreign to me) --Terence

    by astraea on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:30:32 PM PDT

  •  Ethanol fro CO?! That's rather remarkable. (3+ / 0-)

    Taken to its nth degree, a car could theoretically run itself on on its own pollution?!?

    Great Diary!

    "...history is a tragedy not a melodrama" - I.F. Stone

    by bigchin on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 07:39:28 PM PDT

    •  Ethanol from CO2 also (2+ / 0-)

      From another diary I read here a couple months ago-- a team from MIT developing a scheme to capture CO2 emissions from power generation, combine with water and sunlight, and generate massive quantities of algae from which ethanol could be derived. Claim was that it would be hundreds of times more efficient per acre than ethanol from corn (not hard to believe).

      The issue may be the readiness of the process to adapt to industrial scale.

  •  I have some news for anyone who enjoys drinking (6+ / 0-)

    Australian wine.  There will not be a vintage 2007.  We just got the news recently, Mr. Howard has decided to cut off all irrigation water in Australia.  Because of the extreme drought conditions, there will not be any water for farming operations (and that includes wine grapes, fresh fruit, agriculture).  The people in the cities will get their water, but the farmers will be left high and dry.

    This is a disaster for Australia.  There will be many, many bankruptcies, many farmers unable to pay their line of credit at the bank, abandoned properties and so on.  

    Agriculture is a huge part of Australia's country's GDP.  I'm in exporting, so I have to keep track of this stuff.

    Possible backlash:  Expect prices of fruit to go steadily up during the summer and into the fall.  Domestic prices of fruit, and wine in particular will go up in price.  

    Not good.  In fact, it's a catastrophe.

  •  A short pedantic rant about the word silicone (3+ / 0-)

    98% of the occurences of the word "silicone" in articles about photovoltaics are mistakes which should read "silicon".  I don't know if journalists think they are the same stuff or if it's caused by overeager spell checking, but it happens astonishingly often.  For some reason even articles which contain multiple correct instances of "silicon" usually start with a "silicone" in the first paragraph.  This diary, alas, is one such.

  •  Some thoughts / reactions ... (4+ / 0-)
    • So how much bio-fuel could come from the carbon monoxide processes?  Is this "big", when looking to global industrial processes?
    • Howard: His lines could have, of course, been written by Frank Luntz, finding the specific wording to absolve Australians from the need for any action.  The prayer angle ... well, makes about as much sense as his global warming skeptic approach ...
    • The solar dye ... oh, let it be true ... that it becomes affordable to basically paint walls with solar power generating dyes, roofing tiles, etc ... By the way, I continually wonder at the demand that it hit certain levels of efficiency before it can be economically viable. Do I care if the efficiency is just 3% (a number) if the "system" cost is so cheap that produce power is inexpensive compared to other options?

    Blogging regularly at Ecotality Blog for a Sustainable Future.

    by A Siegel on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 08:04:54 PM PDT

    •  Money (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      A Siegel

      Perhaps "money" is not the measure by which we should judge new technologies, or other sustainability choices that we could make. Potential to enhance chances for survival might be a better standard. Money will follow along, not to worry.

      •  Using money as a quick measure ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DBunn

        But the point is simply my confusion ... people will state that a solar system needs to have X% efficiency before it can be viable. Within today's economic structure, isn't the point X cents per kwh?  If we could, for example, develop a solar dye that could be added to paint that, at the end of the day, is so 'cheap' that the additional cost for paint is so neglible that it is basically invisible, well ...

        Sadly, however, 'potential to enchance chances for survival" as a standard for mass, global adoption does not seem to be the measure driving much of anything. If it were, perhaps there would be less wasted energy in the United States and we wouldn't have to make such a big deal about CFLs and there would be lines for green-roof building materials rather than for luxury barbecues and ...

        Blogging regularly at Ecotality Blog for a Sustainable Future.

        by A Siegel on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 08:19:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not to seem an interventionist... (0+ / 0-)

          but wouldn't it work to use policy to shape markets so that the money comes out roughly in accordance with sustainability? As someone said, align the economic incentives with the goals.

          We already do similar things, just not so much for sustainability.

          •  Please ... please ... (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            retrograde, DBunn

            I would love for this to be happening ... actually, what we want is for the sustainable option to come out ahead.

            And, actually, this is the case with many "sustainable" choices in terms of actual 'cost to own' but, sadly, too often people can't get past 'cost to buy'. And, the financial structure (tax, business accounting, real estate processes, etc) disincentivizes that long-term / cost to own better choice that is also better for the environment.  

            A poster child example: Green roofing.

            But, even CFLs: "oh, they're so expensive" ... no, more expensive to buy but (FAR) less expensive to own.

            Blogging regularly at Ecotality Blog for a Sustainable Future.

            by A Siegel on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 09:22:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Surely the people of Austrailia are not the (4+ / 0-)

    wimps that we Americans are.

    to say that climate change is the overwhelming moral challenge for this generation of Australians is misguided at best and misleading at worst.

    So we should all, literally and without any irony, pray for rain over the next six to eight weeks.

    Get that guy outta there!

  •  Love it (the diary, that is) (4+ / 0-)

    Howard sounds like a right dunce, like his manipulative idiot pals Cheney & Bush. "Pray for rain" indeed. What an ass.

    Glad to see NZ taking the lead here. Perhaps because it is small enough to recognize its vulnerability?

  •  Cold, hard cash (2+ / 0-)

    If New Zealand manages to reduce the expense of solar panels to compete with gasoline, then millions or billions of people will be falling over themselves to purchase the panels.  

    Also, it will probably annoy the Australians.

    Dems in 2008: An embarassment of riches. Repubs in 2008: Embarassments.

    by Yamaneko2 on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 09:02:39 PM PDT

    •  Indeed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KiaRioGrl79

      but it will really, REALLY piss off the energy companies who currently make a pile of dough out of the fact that there is an enormous cost of entry to energy conversion (anything to electricity, hydrocarbons trapped in rock to liquid or gaseous fuels etc)

      If the cost of entry comes down to a tin of pain, the next country to be invaded will be NZ.

      Of course, about that moment we will all get to ask Bush "you and whose army?"

      The Number of the Beast 72-25

      by Deep Dark on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 10:20:25 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  thanks for a great diary! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    retrograde
  •  Answering my own question ... (1+ / 0-)

    And You Thought Carbon Monoxide Was Bad is a pretty good discussion of the potential for making fuels from carbon monoxide:

    50 billion gallons of ethanol sounds like a lot of fuel. Is it? Well, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, America currently consumes 384.7 million gallons of gasoline per day. Let’s assume LanzaTech’s ethanol would get the same miles-per-gallon. It’s probably not an accurate assumption, as corn-based ethanol actually gets lower MPG, but we’re being hypothetical here. If MPG was comparable, 50 billion gallons of ethanol would replace nearly 130 days of gasoline usage per year. - more than a third of America’s gasoline usage in a year. (384 million gallons of gasoline per day equates to 9.1 million barrels of oil per day - the United States imports about 10.1 million barrels per day - theoretically, LanzaTech’s innovation could replace almost all of America’s current imported oil.)

    It is a lot of ethanol.

    Note, that 50 billion gallons is just using the emissions from steel production.

    Blogging regularly at Ecotality Blog for a Sustainable Future.

    by A Siegel on Wed Apr 25, 2007 at 09:24:27 PM PDT

  •  It is always good to hear (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    retrograde, KiaRioGrl79, KenBee

    about good news from my former home, New Zealand. Thanks for passing this on.

    Still wondering when Oz will get some sense and put Howard's party out of power.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site