Support the Solar and Clean Energy Initiative!
Dec 18
Yet again California leads the nation in a critical new initiative, and will set an example of what is possible, feasible, and effective. This initiative seeks to set requirements for the minimum percentage of energy production from renewable sources across California. Specific goals are:
2010 - 20% energy production from renewable sources
2020 - 40% energy production from renewable sources
2025 - 50% energy production from renewable sources
To anyone who thinks these are unachievable, consider this: Alameda Power and Telecom produces 85% of their energy from renewable sources TODAY!
The initiative is being led by a former San Francisco supervisor, Jim Gonzalez, and Californians for Solar and Clean Energy. Please visit their site. I will surely sign the petition and encourage all others to do so. And why wait for PG&E to adopt solar on a large scale. You can do this today, cost-effectively, for your own home.
Note, the initiative needs over 400,000 signatures to get on the November 2008 ballot. Please sign up and encourage others to as well!
Sep 02 pm30 17:22
There are too many problems associated with proposition 7 so I will only discuss a few issues here. As a preliminary: 10.9% of the electric energy used in California, according to th Energy Partnership between Sweden and California, April 2008, is considered renewable (4.7% geothermal, 2.1% small hydro, 1.8% wind 2.1% biomass and 0.2% solar). Of the rest, 15.7% is coal, 19.0% is large hydro, 41.5% is Natural Gas and 12.9% is nuclear. Of this mix the most problematic is the 12.9% coal: the vast majority of which is from Arizona and Utah and which creates the most GHG per MWh. Twice that of Natural Gas. These coal plants have long term contracts which could not be abrogated by California. Contracts resultingfrom the ENRON scandal. Most to these contracts will stay in place after 2025. Now some questions.
1. California government and Proposition 7 do not define large hydropower as renewable but the rest of the world does. Look at Wikipedia under renewable energy. Look at http://www.ren21.net
If proposition 7 were to define the term properly we in California would now have 30% renewable. Maybe we do not need proposition 7?
2. If the goal of 50% (at least) renewable energy in 2025 is reached, what happens to the other, mostly benign, electric power which we presently use? Only coal, Natural Gas and biomass give off GHG. Which California plants will have to be decommissioned? At what cost to the state or the rate payers? Why not replace all of the Natural Gas plants? But they are needed as peaker plants to even out the wind and solar variations. Hydro and nuclear are not really suited for that purpose. Wind and sun energy needs to be stored. Ideas, anyone?
3. Are there any business plans by large organizations to build the required renewable wind and solar arrays in our deserts? Again, at what cost? There have been no cost estimates that I can find. No technical details either.
4. More to discuss but not more space.
Michael McCullough 9/2/2008
Aliso Viejo, CA