Excellent paradigm is Brazil...we should take this "train" too...in my opinion
Till yesterday i didnt know anything abouted...and that the Brazilians haid such an important industrie at that level...

Here you Go...

Brazil emerging as leader in production of alternative fuels like ethanol

Highlight:
Brazil has the capacity to produce large volumes of renewable, alternative fuel: ethanol made from sugar beets, potatoes, corn or sugarcane. Brazil's sugarcane crop potential is enormous, giving it the ability to not only grow its own fuels, but to also export them to other countries...

some other good sources also here...

http://www.greencarcongress.com/brazil/

Renewable fuels

Driven to alcohol
Sep 5th 2002 | SAO PAULO
From The Economist print edition

Brazil has another try at running its cars on ethanol made from sugar cane

ONE of the deals struck at the Johannesburg summit on sustainable development was a pact between Brazil and Germany to develop a scheme in which German companies will subsidise Brazilians to buy cars that run on ethanol instead of petrol. That should reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, the principal greenhouse gas covered by the Kyoto protocol, an agreement intended to curb global warming. The “credits” that the German firms earn from this will count towards their country's targets under the protocol. Brazil thinks it will benefit by reducing its dependence on imported oil.

The proposal is part of Brazil's drive to revive its ethanol-fuel programme, which was a huge, though brief, success in the mid-1980s. At its height, three-quarters of all new cars sold in the country ran on pure ethanol. But by the late 1990s this had fallen close to zero (see chart), although all petrol sold in Brazil contains 26% ethanol, a mixture on which standard petrol engines can run without adaptation.

Sugar cane, like other plants, absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere during photosynthesis. Burning ethanol made from sugar thus returns to the atmosphere what was recently there, rather than adding carbon that was previously underground. Unfortunately, turning sugar cane into ethanol uses more energy, and thus causes more greenhouse-gas emission, than making petrol from crude oil. Nevertheless, says Lew Fulton of the International Energy Agency, a sister body of the OECD, studies suggest that Brazil's present method of making ethanol fuel from sugar leads to net savings of about 50% in greenhouse-gas emissions per kilometre travelled, compared with running cars on petrol.

And the cuts in emissions could be much greater. At the moment, after squeezing the sugar out, the crushed cane is chucked away or burnt. Its carbon therefore returns to the atmosphere without doing anything useful. But since the cane itself is made of cellulose—in other words, polymerised sugar—it can be broken down with acid and used to make more ethanol. In America, ethanol is made from maize and other crops by turning their complex carbohydrates into sugar in this way, though this is only viable thanks to big government subsidies.

It was the high cost of imported energy after the 1970s oil shocks, rather than environmental considerations, that made Brazil switch to ethanol the first time round. As one of the world's biggest sugar producers, it assumed it would have no problem guaranteeing its motorists supplies of home-produced ethanol. But a surge in the world price of sugar meant growers could get more money from exporting the stuff than from selling it to local distilleries. As a result, many distilleries shut, leading to shortages of ethanol just as motorists were anyway tiring of the reluctance of ethanol-fuelled cars to start on cold mornings. Meanwhile, the oil shock had given way to an oil-price slump, and petrol was cheap again. Motorists therefore stopped buying ethanol-fuelled cars, and car makers all but stopped making them.

Recently, the oil price has risen, as have worries about Brazil's balance of payments and foreign debt. So the government has decided to try again. It has leant on car makers to introduce new models that run on ethanol and, this month, the sales tax on such cars was cut. Modern fuel-injection means that cold starts are no longer a problem. Motorists are duly returning: in the first seven months of this year, they bought 23,000 ethanol-fuelled cars, compared with fewer than 8,000 in the same period last year. Besides rising oil prices, the sharp fall in the real and improvements in the efficiency of sugar plantations and distilleries mean that ethanol-powered cars may no longer need subsidies to compete with petrol-driven ones, says Dr Fulton, though they still get them.

Of course, there is more to being environmentally friendly than cutting greenhouse gases. Sugar cane is notorious for depleting soil nutrients and thus being a voracious consumer of agro-chemicals. But this is being overcome. Plantations in Brazil are progressively being banned from burning foliage, and persuaded instead to leave it on the ground to compost, returning to the soil much of the nitrogen that the growing plants have removed. On top of this, sugar cane grown for fuel production, rather than for food, can be fertilised using treated sewage, thereby providing a use for the growing quantities of human waste emerging from Brazil's cities.

Many details of the revived ethanol-fuel scheme are still to be worked out—such as how to manage and finance stocks of ethanol to guarantee continuity of supply. But overall, its chances both of saving Brazil money and of helping to avoid global warming look rather better now than they did the first time round.

http://www.economist.com/science/displaySt...tory_id=1313810

and another one here...
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/C...:322341,00.html

I think we are sleeping ... :hammer:

Over the past three decades Brazil has worked to create a viable alternative to gasoline. With its sugarcane-based fuel, the nation may become energy independent this year. Brazil’s ethanol program, which originated in the 1970s in response to the uncertainties of the oil market, has enjoyed intermittent success. Still, many Brazilians are driving “flexible fuel” cars that run on either ethanol or gasoline and allow the consumer to fill up with whichever option is cheaper – often ethanol. Countries with large fuel bills such as India and China are following Brazil’s progress closely. The US is taking small steps towards the use of ethanol, but its process, relying on corn, is lengthier and more expensive. In addition, countries such as Japan and Sweden are importing ethanol from Brazil to help fulfill their environmental obligations under the Kyoto Protocol. Running cars on carbohydrates instead of fossil fuels may not be a new idea, and ethanol has drawbacks, but the fuel offers an attractive alternative as oil prices climb. - YaleGlobal








As Brazil Fills Up on Ethanol, It Weans Off Energy Imports

David Luhnow
Geraldo Samor
The Wall Street Journal, 16 January 2006



RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil -- After nearly three decades of work, Brazil has succeeded where much of the industrialized world has failed: It has developed a cost-effective alternative to gasoline. Along with new offshore oil discoveries, that's a big reason Brazil expects to become energy independent this year.


To see how, take a look at Gildo Ferreira, a 39-year-old real-estate executive, who pulled his VW Fox into a filling station one recent afternoon. Instead of reaching for the gasoline, he spent $29 to fill up his car on ethanol made from sugar cane, an option that's available at 29,000 gas stations from Rio to the Amazon. A comparable tank of gasoline would have cost him $36. "It's cheaper and it's made here in Brazil," Mr. Ferreira says of ethanol. If the price of oil stays at current levels, he can expect to save about $350 a year.

[Saving at the Pump]


At current prices, Brazil can make ethanol for about $1 a gallon, according to the World Bank. That compares with the international price of gasoline of about $1.50 a gallon. Even though ethanol gets less mileage than gasoline, in Brazil it's still cheaper per mile driven. As a result, ethanol now accounts for as much as 20% of Brazil's transport fuel market. The country's use of gasoline has actually declined since the late 1970s. The use of alternative fuels in the rest of the world is a scant 1%.


Yet countries wanting to follow Brazil's example may be leery about following its methods. Military and civilian leaders laid the groundwork by mandating ethanol use and dictating production levels. They bankrolled technology projects costing billions of dollars, despite criticism they were wasting money. Brazil ended most government support for its sugar industry in the late 1990s, forcing sugar producers to become more efficient and helping lower the cost of ethanol's raw material. That's something Western countries are loath to do, preferring to support domestic farmers.


With government support, sugar companies and auto makers' local units delivered cost-saving breakthroughs. "Flexible fuel" cars running ethanol, gasoline or a mixture of both, have become a hit. Car buyers no longer have to worry about fluctuating prices for either fuel because flex-fuel cars allow them to hedge their bets at the pump. Seven out of every 10 new cars sold in Brazil are flex-fuel.


Brazil is also fortunate that sugar is the cheapest way to make ethanol and Brazil has the right conditions for growing the crop -- plenty of land, rain and cheap labor.


Despite these unique circumstances, Brazil's efforts are being closely followed by countries with big fuel bills. India and China have sent a parade of top officials to see Brazil's program. India, the world's second-biggest sugar producer behind Brazil, mandated in 2003 that nine of its states add a 5% ethanol mixture to gas. The Brazilian unit of Germany's Volkswagen AG, the first car maker to introduce a flex-fuel model in Brazil, has received 38 delegations from more than a dozen countries in the past year alone, VW officials say.


Brazil says its ethanol exports will likely double to $1.3 billion in 2010 from $600 million in 2005, largely to Japan and Sweden. These countries hope using ethanol -- which releases less carbon dioxide than fossil fuels -- will help them meet their obligations under the Kyoto Protocol to cut emissions.


The U.S., which currently imports 60% of its oil, is watching Brazil's progress, too. Three members of the Senate Energy Committee recently visited, and Sen. Hillary Clinton has cited Brazil as a role model in cutting dependence on imported oil. When President Bush made a recent stop-over in Brasilia, Brazilian leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva hosted a barbecue and described to Mr. Bush how the country has reduced its oil import bill, according to Brazilian officials at the meeting.


The most recent U.S. energy bill, signed into law in August, calls for more than doubling ethanol use by 2012. But U.S. ethanol, which is made from corn, costs at least 30% more than Brazil's product, in part because the starch in corn must be first turned into sugar before being distilled into alcohol. It may take the U.S. a few more decades to bring the cost of ethanol down to 80 cents a gallon -- equivalent to Brazil's most efficient producers -- according to the U.S. Department of Energy. U.S. trade barriers make Brazilian ethanol and its sugar expensive to buy.


Using carbohydrates instead of fossil-fuels to run cars is not a new idea. Henry Ford's first car was made to run on ethanol. So was the first spark-ignition car engine, developed by German Nicolas Otto in the second half of the 19th century. During World War II, the U.S., Brazil and other nations relied on ethanol to extend gasoline supplies. In the postwar period, however, gasoline was so plentiful and cheap that ethanol lost its allure.


'Strategic Challenge'


The first oil shock in 1973, sparked by an oil embargo amid war in the Middle East, rekindled interest. Months after Syrian and Egyptian tanks rolled into Israeli-held territory, the price of oil quadrupled. Few places were hit harder than Brazil, which imported 80% of its fuel at the time. Within months, Brazil's economy slid into recession. About 40% of its foreign-exchange income was used to import oil.


"We faced a clear strategic challenge: How would we develop without oil?" recalls Eduardo Pereira de Carvalho, a finance ministry official at the time who now heads the São Paulo state sugar-growers' federation.


In 1975, Brazil's military leader, Gen. Ernesto Geisel, ordered that the country's gasoline supply be mixed with 10% ethanol, a level Brazil steadily raised to 25% over the next five years. That meant the same amount of gasoline would last longer. It also allowed Brazil to pay for fuel with local currency, in the form of payments to farmers.


To help the nascent industry, the government gave sugar companies cut-rate loans to build ethanol plants and guaranteed prices for their product. Sugar companies were delighted with the new market, which helped when prices were low. The government also funded Urbano Ernesto Stumpf, an ethanol researcher at a Brazilian Air Force laboratory, who was developing a car that would run on ethanol alone.


In November 1976, three ethanol-powered cars created by Mr. Stumpf -- a Beetle, a Dodge and a Brazilian car called a Gurgel -- embarked on a 5,000 mile trip from the air force's research lab in the southeastern state of São Paulo to the northern city of Manaus in the heart of the Amazon. The trip, christened "The National Integration Rally," aimed to demonstrate to Brazilians that ethanol really worked. When the government ordered state-owned companies to test ethanol engines in their fleet, the São Paulo state telephone company converted 400 gasoline cars into ethanol ones. They displayed the logo: "Powered by Alcohol."


After the 1979 Iranian revolution caused the world's second oil-price shock, Brazil sped up its efforts, initiating what became known as the Proalcool program. In Brazil, ethanol is called "alcool" (pronounced OWL-coal).


Brazil's new leader, Gen. Joao Baptista Figueiredo, ordered sugar companies to ramp up production. He also required state-run oil giant Petrobras to make the fuel available at filling stations. Car companies received tax breaks to get ethanol-powered vehicles into showrooms. By the end of the year, Italian car maker Fiat SpA was offering an ethanol-only car for sale. Within a year, every foreign and domestic auto company in Brazil had followed suit.


Big Hit With Consumers


The cars were hard to start on cold mornings because ethanol burns at a higher temperature than gasoline. Creating a fuel with 10% ethanol makes little difference to a car's performance, but anything above that, researchers have found, can cause problems. The mixture can corrode metal engine parts because of its high water content, for example.


Nonetheless, the cars were big hits with consumers, largely because government price supports made the fuel 35% cheaper than gasoline at the pump. Ethanol also helps acceleration, an advantage in a country where Formula One racing is a national passion. By 1983, nine out of every 10 new cars sold in Brazil ran on ethanol alone.


While motorists grew fond of the made-in-Brazil fuel, there was a cost in the form of hefty government subsidies. Consulting firm Datagro, which counts Brazil's biggest sugar companies as its clients, estimates that Brazil spent at least $16 billion in 2005 dollars from 1979 to the mid-1990s on loans to sugar companies and price supports. The Datagro estimate doesn't include foregone revenue from tax breaks as well as other costs to consumers.


In 1986, after civilians replaced generals in Brazilian politics, the world price of oil plunged, endangering the government's pledge to keep the price of ethanol below that of gasoline. In the following years, the country was battered by hyperinflation, prompting the International Monetary Fund and other creditors to urge Brasilia to rein in spending. In 1989, President Jose Sarney started cutting ethanol price supports. Sales of ethanol cars plummeted and some Brazilians felt the entire experiment had been a waste.


But the ethanol market never dried up entirely, thanks largely to the decades of groundwork. Sugar companies continued to make the fuel and learned how to cut costs, encouraged by a state requirement that all gasoline be mixed with ethanol. Gas stations still offered the fuel, which is taxed at just nine cents a liter compared with about 42 cents a liter for gasoline, according to World Bank estimates.


While other countries were busy mapping the human genome, Brazilian scientists at the Centro de Tecnologia Canavieira, a research lab funded by sugar growers, were decoding the DNA of sugar cane. That helped them select varieties that were more resistant to drought and pests and yielded more sugar content.


The center is located in the heart of Brazil's sugar country, about two hours drive from São Paulo. Giant satellite images of sugar fields help researchers identify which variety will grow best in which part of the country, where to locate new fields and the best time to harvest. Over the past 20 years, the center has developed some 140 varieties of sugar, which has helped lower growing costs by more than 1% a year, according to Jaime Finguerut, the center's director of ethanol research.


Other improvements include using remains of processed cane to power sugar and ethanol plants, and using industrial waste from ethanol production to fertilize sugar fields. As a result, the productivity of Brazil's ethanol producers has steadily increased. In 1975, Brazil squeezed 2,000 liters, or about 520 gallons, of ethanol from a hectare, or nearly 2.5 acres, of sugar cane. Today, it's nearly 6,000 liters.


As gasoline prices soared in recent years, ethanol rebounded. By 2002, its price was again competitive with gasoline and old ethanol-only cars started recovering their prestige. Last year, thieves stole an ethanol-only, 1994 Ford Royale, owned by Francisco Baccaro Nigro, one of the engineers who helped develop ethanol-only cars. "I'm sure it's because ethanol is cheaper," Mr. Nigro says. "Thieves know this."


One last step remained. Some consumers were leery of buying ethanol cars because they weren't convinced the fuel would remain cheaper than gasoline.


A Cheaper Device

[Fernando Damasceno]


Fernando Damasceno, chief engineer at the Brazilian unit of Italian car parts company Magneti Marelli, thought the solution was to create cars that ran on either fuel equally well. Ford Motor Co. had offered flex-fuel cars in the U.S. since 1991 but the Brazilians thought its flex-fuel device expensive and cumbersome.


Mr. Damasceno created a cheaper device by programming a standard car computer to constantly calculate the mixture of ethanol versus gasoline in the tank and adjust the engine accordingly. In 2002, the team sold the device to Volkswagen, which introduced its flex-fuel Gol the next year. Mr. Damasceno's black box is now sold by five major car makers in Brazil. Even Ford's Brazil unit uses the Damasceno device.


In Ford's newest ad in Brazil, an indecisive young boy can't decide between a pair of brown and red shoes. As a teenager, he can't pick between a blonde and a brunette at a party. The ad ends with the young man pulling up to a gas station in his Ford Ecosport. The attendant asks: "Alcohol or gasoline?" The man, happy he doesn't have to choose, raises two fingers, signifying both.






Source:
The Wall Street Journal
http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6817

Questions and Answers
From Vincent Ciulla,
Your Guide to Auto Repair.
FREE Newsletter. Sign Up Now!
Ethanol As A Fuel
Q. I was hoping you could help me answer a question. Can a regular car engine, say a 1993 Volkswagen Van, run on 100% Ethanol?

If so, why do we not use more of it. Here in Colorado, we have a law that says from Nov 1 to Feb 1 we must use gas with at least 10% ethanol. It burns cleaner and Denver is in a big bowl valley. We get a lot of smog days if the wind is not blowing the smog out of the bowl!

So, if we can burn 10% ethanol, why not more? And why not now, with the number of gas guzzling Suburban's out there with owners whining about the price of gas?

Anyway, any help you can give is appreciated.
Ginny

A. Ginny, I'm glad you asked that question. There's been a lot of questions about the use of ethanol blended fuels in the last couple of years and I have done some research into it. Here in Minnesota 10% ethanol has been mandatory for over two years and I have not seen any adverse problems to car engines due to it's use.

First of all, what is ethanol? Fuel ethanol (or 'Gasohol') is a high octane, water-free alcohol produced from the fermentation of sugar or converted starch. It is traditionally used as a blending ingredient at 5% to 10% concentrations (termed E5 or E10, respectively) in gasoline or as a raw material to produce high octane fuel ether additives. Ethanol is made primarily from grains or other renewable agricultural and agroforestry feedstocks.

Ethanol has been made since ancient times by the fermentation of sugars. All beverage ethanol and more than half of industrial ethanol is still made by this process. Simple sugars are the raw material. Zymase, an enzyme from yeast, changes the simple sugars into ethanol and carbon dioxide. If you use hops instead of corn, you get beer instead of fuel.

The use of ethanol does provide some benefits. First of all it is renewable. The problem with crude oil is when it's gone, it's gone. No more, finished, kaput, finis. 1 acre corn = 300 gallons of Ethanol and 400 gallons of unneeded oil imports. Ethanol is made from corn and other grown grains and when was the last time you saw a year where there wasn't any corn around? Since it contains a high amount of oxygen it makes a car engine cleaner burning resulting in a cleaner environment for us to live in. Carbon dioxide emissions are lower thus reducing ground level ozone which people with respiratory problems will be the first to tell you is a problem.

The emissions produced by burning ethanol are less reactive with sunlight than those produced by burning gasoline. This results in a lower potential for damaging the ozone layer. The use of ethanol reduces our dependance on imported oil and increases the market for farmers who grow the grains we use to produce ethanol. Now we can stop paying farmers not grow crops and use their excess production as fuel.

Of course there are some by-products of ethanol production that have to be dealt with. By-products such as corn flour, corn oil, corn meal and corn grits. Other by-products are animal feeds such as Fibrotein TM, corn gluten meal and feed and certain amino acids. Carbon dioxide is another by-product in ethanol production and is used as a refrigerant and putting the fizz in our sodas. There are no waste products when ethanol is produced from corn.

It is possible, with certain engine modifications, to run on pure ethanol. Brazil operates almost 50% of their vehicles on pure ethanol. A 10% blend requires no engine modifications at all. There is a very limited selection of vehicles offered by original equipment manufacturers that will run on 85% ethanol blended fuel.

Car owners are concerned about what effects ethanol will have on their engines and fuel systems, a valid concern. Let me take this a step at a time.

Copyright © 2000 - 2003 Vincent T. Ciulla All Rights Reserved

http://autorepair.about.com/cs/generalinfo/a/aa102100a.htm

excelent...! :thumbsup:

Re gamoto Zaharokalama boroume na fytepsoume sthn Ellada...? Kanas geoponos edoooooo....? lol

Mainstreaming renewable energy in the 21st Century
By Janet L. Sawin


It's not a pipe dream, it's a fact: renewables can provide an increasing proportion of our energy in the next 100 years. In the last decade, industry laggards have become market leaders, and their experience shows other countries how it can be done, writes Janet L. Sawin.


A residential rooftop PV installation in the Aichi prefecture of Japan. The country's PV roofs programme is perhaps the most important government PV programme in history MITSUBISHIDuring the past year, Shanghai's gleaming shopping malls have gone for hours without heat on winter days, while children study by candlelight and factories shut down for lack of power. The lights are out across much of China because energy supply cannot keep up with the rapidly rising energy demand, which has been driven up by extraordinary economic growth. Simultaneous shortages of oil, electricity, and coal have sparked concerns about an impending energy crisis and, ironically, are slowing further economic expansion. Once a net exporter of oil and coal, China is now second only to the US in oil imports, and could be a major coal importer within four years. At the same time, the World Bank estimates that the environmental and health costs of air pollution in China, primarily as a result of coal burning, could total 13% of China's gross domestic product (GDP) by 2020.1

And China is not alone. Demand for energy continues to rise rapidly in many developing countries as people increasingly adopt the transportation systems, diets, and lifestyles of consumers in the world's richest nations. The International Energy Agency projects that, between 2000 and 2030, global energy consumption will increase by 66%, and electricity use could double. The largest share of this growth is likely to occur in the developing world.

Although new conventional power plants will come on-line in China by 2006, easing current shortages, they will be only temporary fixes for an emerging challenge that developing and industrial nations alike must soon confront. How can the world's voracious and growing appetite for energy be satisfied, when it is relentlessly increasing the pressure on non-renewable resources, public health and welfare, international stability and the natural environment?

RENEWABLES: SERIOUS ENERGY OPTIONS
The need for new energy sources has never been greater, and renewables are proving that they can meet the needs of developing and industrial societies alike. For most developing countries that lack fossil fuels but have rich renewable and human labour resources, renewable energy is a perfect match, making it possible to create millions of jobs while reducing the foreign exchange burden of imported fuels. The same holds true for much of the industrial world as well, where renewables can meet rising demand and replace obsolete systems.

And the social, environmental, economic and security advantages of shifting from conventional energy to renewable energy are numerous and compelling. These advantages led the G8's Task Force on Renewable Energy to conclude in 2001 that 'though there will be a higher cost in the first decades, measured solely in terms of the costs so far reflected in the market, successfully promoting renewables over the period to 2030 will prove less expensive than taking a "business as usual" approach within any realistic range of discount rates.'2

Markets for the new renewables are expected to approach $85 billion annually within the next decade

Since the 1980s, renewable technologies have improved significantly in performance and cost, with some undergoing rates of growth and technology advancement comparable only with the electronics industry. Wind and solar power are the fastest growing energy sources in the world, experiencing double-digit capacity growth on an annual basis over the past decade. Wind power already provides electricity for the equivalent of 19 million European households. By some estimates, 'new renewables' (that is, all renewables apart from conventional biomass and large-scale hydro power) account for well over 100,000 MW of grid-connected electric capacity. Globally, new renewable energy supplies the equivalent of the residential electricity needs of more than 300 million people.3

It is estimated that more than US$20 billion were invested in new renewables in 2003, up to one sixth of total global investments in power generation equipment. Cumulative investments in renewable energy totalled at least $100 billion between 1995 and 2003, and markets for new renewable energy are expected to approach $85 billion annually within the next decade.4 The impacts of such growth could be revolutionary. The immediate effects include rapidly declining costs, impressive technology advances, and growing economic power and broad-based political support, which in turn are leading to further policy reforms and even faster growth. Although new renewables currently meet only 2% of global energy demand, the technical potential of these inexhaustible and relatively benign energy sources far exceeds total energy use.

The vast potential is shown by the fact that the past decade's growth in renewable energy has largely taken place in six countries - Denmark, Germany, India, Japan, Spain and the US - which together account for about 80% of global photovoltaic and wind power capacity. And while it has not played much of a role in the dramatic growth renewables have experienced during the past decade, Brazil is also an important example of success, sourcing a large proportion of its fuel from bioethanol.

Unlike the markets for oil or coal, the dominant role of these nations in renewables does not reflect fortunate accidents of geography and resource availability. Instead, the advancement of renewables has been driven by strong, sustained government policies, designed to nurture nascent energy industries and to create demand for these technologies, often in markets dominated by mature, heavily subsidized fossil fuels and nuclear power. The costs of these policies have been relatively minor compared to the leverage they have provided, spurring billions of dollars' worth of research and development and capital investment by the private sector, and attracting major corporations including BP, Royal Dutch/Shell, and GE.

The experiences of Germany, Japan and Brazil are useful in understanding the relative value of specific policies to encourage the development and use of renewable energy, and demonstrate that renewable energy can advance dramatically and rapidly worldwide if governments enact the right mix of policies.

THE GERMAN STORY

Since the early 1990s, Germany and Japan have achieved dramatic successes with renewable energy and today lead the world in the use of wind power and solar PV, respectively. The common elements to their experiences are long-term commitments to advancing renewable energy, effective and consistent policies, the use of gradually declining subsidies, and an emphasis not only on government R&D but also on market penetration.

At the beginning of the 1990s, Germany had virtually no renewable energy industry, and it seemed unlikely that it would ever be at the forefront of these technologies. Yet, within 10 years Germany had transformed itself into a renewable energy leader. With a fraction of the wind and solar potential of the US, Germany now has more than twice as much installed wind capacity - indeed, more than one third of global capacity - and is also a world leader in PV. In the space of a decade, the country has created a new, multibillion-dollar industry and tens of thousands of new jobs.

Driven by growing public concerns about the safety of nuclear power, the security of energy supplies and the environmental impacts of energy use (including climate change), the German Government passed an energy law in 1990 that required utilities to purchase the electricity generated from all renewable technologies in their supply area, and to pay a minimum price for it - at least 90% of the retail price, in the case of wind and solar power. This Electricity Feed-in Law was inspired in part by similar policies that had proved effective in neighbouring Denmark. The preferential payments for renewable energy are intended to help internalize the costs of conventional energy, and compensate for the benefits of renewables.

This pricing law has been adjusted many times since it took effect in 1991. Most significantly, in 2000 the Bundestag (the first chamber of the German Parliament) required that renewable electricity be distributed among all suppliers based on their total electricity sales, ensuring that no one region would be overly burdened. With scientific input and advice from the various renewables industries, specific payments on a per kilowatt-hour basis were established for each renewable technology, based on the real costs of generation. Tariffs are paid for 20 years, while the rate for new projects is adjusted regularly to account for changes in the marketplace and technological advances.

Within 10 years, Germany created a multibillion-dollar renewables industry and tens of thousands of new jobs

Soon after the first pricing law was established, farmers, small investors and start-up manufacturers started to create a new industry from scratch, and wind energy development in Germany began a steady and dramatic surge. Barriers to renewables remained, but as each new hurdle arose, the Government enacted laws or established programmes to address it. Obstacles to wind, for example, included lengthy, inconsistent, and complex siting procedures. The Government responded by encouraging communities to zone specific areas for wind. As of 2000, grid operators were required to connect plants at the most suitable location and pay for necessary upgrading, eliminating barriers that arose when utilities discouraged wind development through inflated, connection-related charges.


Wind turbines at Elstra, in the Saxony region of Germany. Among the pioneers of
the German wind boom were the country's farmers REPOWER SYSTEMS
AG/JAN OELKER
Germany addressed the challenge of renewables' high initial capital costs through low-interest loans offered by major banks and refinanced by the federal government. Until mid- 2003, the '100,000 Roofs' programme provided 10-year low-interest loans for PV installation (it ended early when capacity targets were met). Income tax credits granted for projects and equipment that meet specified standards have provided tax deductions against investments in renewable energy projects. Over the years, these credits have drawn billions of dollars to the renewables industries.

In addition, the federal and state governments have funded renewable resource studies both on- and offshore, have established institutes to collect and publish data, and have advanced awareness about renewable technologies through publication of subsidies, and through architectural, engineering, and other relevant vocational training programmes.

Of all these policies, the pricing law has had the greatest impact. It ended uncertainties about whether, and at what price, producers could sell electricity onto the grid. It also boosted investor confidence, making it easier for even small producers to obtain bank loans, and drawing money into the industries. Increased investment drove improvements in technology, advanced learning and experience, and produced economies of scale that have led to dramatic cost reductions. The average cost of manufacturing wind turbines in Germany fell 43% between 1990 and 2000, and the cost of total PV systems declined 39% between 1992 and 2002.5


Schilmeier biogas plant, Obermichelbach/Roth, Germany; in addition to its commanding position in the wind and PV sectors, Germany has Europe's highest installed biogas capacity GE JENBACHER Not surprisingly, German wind capacity has mushroomed, from 56 MW in early 1991 to 14,609 MW at the end of 2003. Germany overtook the US to become the world's leading wind energy producer in 1997, and wind power now meets more than 6% of Germany's total electricity demand, up from 3% in late 2001. As for PV, since 1992 it has grown at an average annual rate of nearly 49%. Germany ended 2003 with 417 MW of installed PV, mostly on-grid, and is now second only to Japan in PV capacity.6

In 2002 alone, the sales in German renewable energy industries totalled nearly $11 billion, according to the German Federal Ministry for the Environment. Furthermore, the German renewable energy association, BWE, notes that some 45,000 people worked in the country's wind industry by early 2003, a fifth of them hired during the previous year. The 100,000 Roofs programme in itself created an estimated 10,000 new jobs, and Germany accounts for most of Europe's PV installations.7 Germany also boasts Europe's largest shares of biogas capacity and solar thermal water heaters. With so many Germans employed in renewables industries or owning shares in manufacturers of, for instance, wind turbines and solar systems, renewable energy enjoys broad support there.


As well as being a wind and solar leader, Germany boasts Europe's largest shares of biogas and solar water heating

The German Government aims for wind power to meet 25% of national electricity needs by 2025, and intends for Germany to meet at least half of its total energy needs renewably by 2050.The total costs - both past and future - of market development programmes for all new energy technologies up to 2050 appear to be significantly lower than the total spent in that period on coal.

JAPAN: 'LAND OF THE RISING SUN'
Japan's story with PV is similar. It was a minor player in the early 1990s, manufacturing PV units primarily for use in calculators and watches, but rose to become the world's largest producer and user in less than a decade. With far less land area and about half the solar insolation of California, Japan now has three times as much PV capacity as the entire US. Figure 1 shows how installations in Japan compare with those in Germany and the US.

Driven by concerns about energy security and climate change, Japan has enacted effective and consistent policies to promote PV, and has retained them even through major budget crises. The 'New Sunshine' programme was established in 1992 to introduce renewable energy throughout the country. Targets were set, and a new net metering law was enacted to require utilities to purchase excess PV power at the retail rate. Two years later, Japan launched the 'Solar Roofs' programme to promote PV through low-interest loans, a comprehensive education and awareness programme, and rebates for grid-connected residential systems, in return for data about systems operations and output. At the time, Japan had about 31 MW of installed PV,

FIGURE 1. Annual PV capacity additions in Japan, the US and Germany.
Sources: (1993-2002) IEA, PVPS; (2003 estimate) Paul Maycock
The residential rebates started at 50% of installed costs and declined gradually over time. In 1997,rebates were extended to owners and developers of housing complexes as well, and Japan became the world's largest supporter of PV, with a sevenfold increase in funding for the expanded programme. This became known as the '70,000 Roofs' programme. The budget for the residential PV dissemination programme increased from $20 million in 1994 to a peak of $219 million in the fiscal year 2001;the budget for the fiscal year 2004 is just under $49 million.

Government promotion of PV has included publicity on television and in print media. The national government has also encouraged the use of PV in its office buildings, and many local governments provide PV subsidies and low-interest loans. As a result of Japan's net metering law, Japanese electric power companies bought more than 124 GWh of surplus PV power at retail rates between April 2001 and March 2002 alone.

The goal of Japan's PV programme has been to create market awareness and stimulate production in order to reduce costs through economies of scale and technology improvements, and thereby enable large-scale power generation and the export of PV products to the rest of the world. Japan is now the world's leader in the manufacture and use of solar PV, having surpassed the US in both respects in the late 1990s.

A number of policies have contributed to PV's success in Japan, but the 70,000 Roofs programme is considered by some to be the most important government PV programme in history. While some subsidies remain at the national, state, and municipal levels, the Solar Roofs programme officially ended in 2002, after exceeding all objectives. The programme resulted in the installation of more than 144,000 residential systems, with capacity totalling 424 MW. Nearly 43,000 households applied for funding from the programme in 2002 alone, when subsidies were down to about $1 per Watt.8 Primarily due to the residential programme, total installed PV capacity in Japan has increased an average of more than 42% annually since 1992, totalling 887 MW by the end of 2003.6 The Japanese Government aims for total PV installations to reach 4820 MW by 2010.

Despite the decline in subsidies, the number of new home installations continues to rise as costs fall, and Japan's PV market is expected to continue growing by 20% annually over the next few years, according to Paul Maycock of PV News. By some accounts, small system costs in Japan have dropped more than 80% since 1993, far more rapidly than the decrease in global module costs over this period. Installed costs of residential grid-connected systems have fallen from $11 per Watt in 1995 to about $5.50 per Watt in 2003, not including subsidies. As a result, on-grid PV-generated power in Japan, at 11-15 US cents/kWh, is now cheaper than retail electricity.6

Japan's PV market is expected to continue growing by 20% annually over the next few years

To keep up with rising demand, Japanese PV manufacturers have invested significantly in plants and equipment, increasing their production capacity by nearly 47% in 2002 and 45% in 2003.8 Japan was responsible for half of global PV production in 2003, and Sharp has been the world's leading producer of solar cells since 2000.

ETHANOL IN BRAZIL
Brazil established its National Alcohol Program (PROÁLCOOL) in 1975 in response to the first oil crisis. Its aim was to reduce the nation's oil imports and avoid an economic downturn. The programme included a requirement that all oil be blended with alcohol (ethanol) - the exact share has been regulated through government decree, through subsidies to increase the production of sugar cane and construction of distilleries, and through the promotion of 100% ethanol cars. In addition, infrastructure was developed around the country to distribute ethanol to thousands of pumping stations.

Loading a sugar cane harvest for transport in Brazil UNICA

As a result, ethanol vehicle sales soared, reaching a high of 96% of total vehicle sales in the mid-1980s.9 Sales of all-alcohol cars declined precipitously with a decline in oil prices and the 1989 ethanol shortage, but are again on the rise due to government fleets of ethanol vehicles and new tax credits in alcohol-producing regions of the country. Despite its significant petroleum reserves, Brazil now imports 40%-50% of its oil, and energy security concerns are driving these new programmes. In addition, the desire to lower dependence on imported diesel and to reduce pollution levels has led to development of a national biodiesel programme, which includes a long-term goal of 20% quotas by 2020.

Today, modern biomass provides about 20% of Brazil's primary energy supply, with much of this being alcohol fuels; in fact, Brazil consumes more than two thirds of the world's ethanol.10 The cost of producing ethanol in Brazil has declined by 4%-5% annually since 1975, and ethanol is now cheaper per unit of energy than gasoline, even without subsidies. In addition, PROÁLCOOL has created more than a million jobs and reduced the nation's CO2 emissions to 20% of what they would otherwise have been. Brazil is also now an exporter of ethanol fuel. It has been estimated that over the past 27 years, the nation's savings from avoided fuel imports exceed US$52 billion, many times the investments in related industry sectors.11

Ethanol production costs have declined by 4%-5% annually since 1975, and it is now cheaper per unit of energy
than gasoline

POLICY LESSONS FROM AROUND THE WORLD
It is difficult to claim that something is impossible once it has already occurred. This is why it is globally significant that two of the world's largest economies transformed themselves from laggards to leaders in renewable technologies in less than a decade. What Germany and Japan have accomplished can be replicated elsewhere - with the right mix of policies.

For renewable energy to make as large as possible a contribution to economic development, job creation, lower oil dependence and reduced greenhouse gas emissions, it is essential to improve the efficiency of technologies, reduce their costs, and develop mature, self-sustaining industries. Today's energy markets frustrate efforts to achieve these goals because of lack of access to the electric grid at reasonable prices, high initial costs compared with conventional energy sources, and widespread ignorance about the scale of resources available, the pace of development of renewable technologies, or the potential economic advantages of renewable energy.

It is essential to establish the conditions for sustained and profitable industries. These in turn will boost renewable energy capacity and generation, encourage innovation, and will drive down costs. Viable, clear and long-term government commitments are critical to this endeavour, along with policies that create markets and ensure a fair rate of return for investors.

The dramatic successes seen in Germany and Japan stem from a range of policies introduced to address these barriers. They demonstrate that policies play a far greater role than a nation's resource base in determining its renewable energy generation. They also demonstrate that, in addition to the global learning curve that is driving down technology costs, there is a national learning curve that drives domestic costs down even faster and further as countries develop domestic industries to manufacture, install, and maintain renewable systems using local equipment and labour.

What Germany and Japan have accomplished can be replicated - with the right mix of policies

The experiences of Germany, Japan, Brazil and other countries provide an array of promising policy options that can be disseminated around the world. A number of policy lessons can be learnt from their experiences.


a Includes all renewables unless otherwise noted.
b RPS mandate for investor-owned utilities only; credit for existing but not new small hydro power plants.
c Countries above this target must maintain their current share.


Access to the market must be ensured. Pricing (feed-in) laws have proved most successful to date for creating a market for renewable electricity, while also encouraging steady industry growth and private sector investment in R&D, and offering ease of financing. Quota systems (such as the renewable portfolio standards - RPS - established in several US states to promote renewable electricity, and the ethanol programme in Brazil) have also been useful. (See also article by Lisa Wood)
Financial incentives (including tax credits, rebates, payments and low-interest loans) are also important for encouraging investment in renewables by reducing investors' risks and compensating for high upfront capital costs. Incentives should be phased out gradually as costs decline.
Dissemination of information - regarding resource availability, the benefits of renewable energy, international statistics and government incentives, and policy successes and failures - is necessary so that prospective investors and customers are apprised of the potential and advantages of renewables. This is the way to dispel myths and ensure that trained workers are available to produce, install and maintain renewable energy equipment.
Public participation and ownership in the renewables development process increase political support and the likelihood of success.

Industry standards and permitting can prevent inferior hardware from getting onto the marketplace and eroding investor and customer confidence, while also addressing potential sources of opposition such as noise and visual impact.

FIGURE 2. Annual wind capacity additions in Germany, the US and Spain, 1980-
2003.This indicates the importance of consistent policies on the market. Note
that 'negative' additions on this graph are when more power went off-line than
on-line. Sources: (1980-2001) Germany - BWE, EWEA; US - Paul Gipe, AWEA;
Spain - Instituto para la Diversificacion y Ahorro Energetico; (2002) BTM
Consult ApS; (2003 estimate) EWEA, AWEA
More broadly, governments must rethink their relationship with the conventional energy industry, which is characterized by substantial, long-standing subsidies - in recent years, subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear power have totalled up to $300 billion annually. Reducing or eliminating these subsidies, incorporating all costs into the price of energy, and shifting government purchases from conventional to renewable energies would help to level the playing field for renewable technologies. Table 1 gives an overview of renewables targets, and installed capacity, for a number of regions of the world. Finally, policies enacted to advance the development and use of renewables must be consistent and long-term, to avoid the boom-and-bust cycles that shake investor confidence and choke off the supply of capital. In terms of the wind market, the impact of consistent (and inconsistent) policies can be seen in Figure 2.

UNLOCKING OUR ENERGY FUTURE
In early January 2004, the US unmanned rover Spirit touched down on the surface of Mars, and within days began relaying to Earth dramatic photographs of a red, rock-strewn surface, distant hills, and a rust-coloured sky from 170 million kilometres (106 million miles) away. Humanity now has a clearly established presence on two planets - one of them powered primarily by renewable energy. PV modules enable Spirit and its twin, Opportunity, to roll across the planet's surface, operate sophisticated cameras and rock abrasion tools, analyse materials, and send valuable data and photographs back to Earth. In fact, without energy from the sun and high-tech, reliable, renewable technologies such as PV, space exploration itself would be impossible.

It is possible to create vibrant markets for renewable energy, and to do so rapidly

It will be a long time before renewables achieve the penetration level on Earth that they currently enjoy on Mars, but renewable energy is coming of age even on our planet. After more than a decade of double-digit growth, renewable energy is a multibillion-dollar global business. Wind power is leading the way in many nations, supplying more than 20% of the electricity needs in some regions and countries; it represents almost half of global investment in renewable technologies, and in good sites is now cost-competitive with conventional energy technologies. Solar cells are already the most affordable option for getting modern energy services to hundreds of millions of people in developing countries, and on-grid generation is today competitive in Japan. The costs continue to fall rapidly.

Whether renewable energy capacity and investment continues to grow at current levels will hinge largely on policy decisions made by governments around the world. Today, most of the world is locked into a carbon-based energy system that is neither better nor necessarily cheaper than renewable energy, but merely the legacy of past policies and investment decisions. Breaking with this past will not be easy - but Germany, Japan, and other countries have demonstrated that it is possible to create vibrant markets for renewable energy, and to do so rapidly.

The key is ambitious, forward-looking and consistent government policies that drive demand for renewable energy, and create a self-reinforcing market. New laws to promote renewables are being introduced almost continually at the state and national levels worldwide. If more countries continue to board the renewable energy bandwagon, renewables could reach a tipping point that propels them into the mainstream during the 21st century, and provides humanity with a cleaner, safer, healthier, and more equitable world.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Janet L. Sawin, Ph.D., is Director of the Worldwatch Institute's Energy and Climate Change Program. Her doctoral thesis, completed September 2001 at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, examined the impact of government policy on the advancement of renewable energy technologies. Janet is author of the background paper on 'National Policy Instruments' for Renewables2004, and of Worldwatch Paper 169, entitled Mainstreaming Renewable Energy in the 21st Century.
e-mail: jsawin@worldwatch.org
web: www.worldwatch.org

This article is based on Mainstreaming Renewable Energy in the 21st Century (Worldwatch Paper 169, Washington, DC, May 2004). Copies of the full report can be purchased on-line at www.worldwatch.org.

Complete information on sources can be found in the full report; the sources for text on Brazil can be found in 'National Policy Instruments: Policy Lessons for the Advancement and Diffusion of Renewable Energy Technologies Around the World,' by Janet L. Sawin, Thematic Background Paper 3, prepared for the International Conference on Renewable Energies, Bonn, Germany, 1-4 June 2004.

___________________________

Resume...

Gents there are plenty of other sources for use ...as Power...I think also Wasserstoff (in german) and the new founded sources at the bottom of the Oceans...called Methadon something ...which isnt yet stabile and secure to get...is the future...Buy buy Oil...and the Prices...

Regards

Even Plains are Flying... :o

There are a huge amount of clean and renewable energy sources that havent been used up to their potential.


For example:



Biomass: Organic Energy Production
As alternative and renewable energy sources (RES) take their place in the mainstream of energy production, wide-ranging investment opportunities are becoming part of the economic landscape. In Greece, there are especially attractive opportunities to invest in RES. The Greek government has announced recently that RES are a vital part of Greece's total energy programme, and incentives for RES investment in Greece are among the most attractive in Europe.
One of the most promising RES sectors is biomass, since Greece's agricultural production is suitable to support this important energy source. In recent years, biomass has accounted for an increasing share in meeting energy needs world-wide. It is seen as an inexhaustible source of energy, capable of contributing to sufficiency in supplying energy needs after the exhaustion of the reserves of crude oil, coal, and natural gas.

Renewable energy sources (RES) contributed 5.2%, (1.46 Mtoe [million tons of oil equivalent]) to the Greek Total Primary Energy Supply in 2000 and of this, biomass accounted for 67% (0.946 Mtoe). Domestic use of wood for cooking, water and heating accounted for roughly 74% (0.70 Mtoe) of total biomass energy production. The remaining 26% (0.24Mtoe) was produced by the combustion of wood by-products and agro-industrial residues and the utilization of biogas produced in landfills, agro-food industries and municipal wastewater treatment plants. A number of biogas-to-electricity installations—including a 240 kWe (kilo watt electric) plant in a municipal solid waste landfill in northern Greece, a 193 kWe plant in a municipal wastewater treatment plant and a 166 kWe plant in southern Greece, as well as 10 biogas-to-heat installations (with a total heat production of 58 TJ)—have been realized so far, and others are currently being planned.

Biomass, in the broadest meaning of the term, includes any material derived from living organisms. Biomass for energy purposes includes any kind of material that can be used for the production of solid, liquid, and/or gas fuels.

Agriculture is a source of considerable quantities of biomass that can be used in regional bioenergy schemes. According to an OECD publication on Biomass and Agriculture: Sustainability, Markets and Policies, it is estimated that approximately 3.8 million dry tons of field crop and arboricultural residues are theoretically available for energy production, with a total energy potential of 69 PJ (petajoules)/year.

The main types of agro-industries in Greece are rice, cotton-gining, corn, fruit, wine, seed oil, olives, olive oil, and olive kernel.

The Greek livestock system consists of sheep, goats, lambs, cows, calves, swine, broilers, layers, and breeding pullets. The use of livestock wastes for energy generation and recycling in agriculture is not very well developed in Greece. Concerning biogas potential, it is estimated to be 240,000 m3/day, with the equivalent energy content of more than 200 tons of oil equivalent (toe). This amounts to some 5.6 PJ annual energy production, which could cover 0.7% of the total energy demand in Greece.

Greece possesses important agricultural and forestry residues for the production of energy. The agricultural residues available for this purpose from cereals, maize, cotton, tobacco, sunflowers, prunings, vines and wood pith amount annually to 7,500,000 tons or approximately 3,000,000 TOE. Forestry residues may amount to 2,700,000 tons or approximately 1,000,000 TOE.

The favorable climatic conditions prevailing in Greece result in the existence of a great variety of residues and high yields from the energy crops in question. Experiments conducted in Greece, in the context of various EU programs, have shown that sweet sorghum can easily yield up to a ton of bioethanol (BE) per 1,000 sq. m., with prospects for doubling that figure within a decade. The cost of cultivation of the raw material is approximately that of the cultivation of maize. Consequently, it would be possible, in a first phase, for the country to produce BE for motor vehicle fuels, on a broad scale, at not particularly high cost.

During the last decade more than 60 experiments have been conducted throughout Greece to evaluate the biomass-yielding potential of several energy crops. Most of the crops studied exhibited good adaptability to Greek climatic conditions as well as high yields in terms of fresh biomass and dry matter.

Biomass energy offers new technology investment opportunities and the development of cleaner, more resource efficient industries. There are considerable opportunities for investment in proven technologies offering commercially attractive returns. Examples include sewage gas, landfill gas, and biocogeneration in the wood industry. This generally involves international transfer of technology and know-how. In addition, it is technically straightforward to retrofit existing fossil-fuel plants to use biomass fuels. This is becoming increasingly financially attractive, with more carbon/energy taxes and carbon finance (emissions trading) being done currently.

Greece's biomass energy projects are looked upon by the government very favorably since they are direct drivers of regional development.



Current and Potential Bioenergy Applications

Biomass use for energy purposes results in significant social and economic benefits (providing farmers with additional income or maintaining their standard of income and maintaining jobs in rural areas), and the restructuring of the agricultural sector on both a national and regional level.

The main benefits of bioenergy in Greece include:


Mitigation of CO2 emissions and reduced growth of lignite use
Compliance with the reformed CAP:
Jobs: maintenance of employment in the agricultural sector, along with the creation of a few jobs at “village level” where the biomass power plant will be established.
Rural revenue: rural revenue is expected to increase following the creation of supplementary markets for residues, as well as the introduction of energy crops into the existing agricultural system.
Diversification: the introduction of bioenergy crops may enhance the diversification of agricultural production.
New enterprises can be established both for the handling/pre-treatment of agricultural biomass and for the operation of local bioenergy plants.
Current Bioenergy Applications in Greece include:


Several cotton-ginning factories use their residues to produce heat required for cotton drying and heating of their facilities. The total heat energy produced has been estimated at 0.4 PJ/year.
The olive kernel wood produced in the olive kernel factories is being used for greenhouse heating, heating buildings, etc. The total heat energy produced has been estimated at 8.3 PJ/year.
Fruit kernels (produced by fruit canneries) and shells (from almond, walnut and hazelnut peeling plants) are being used for greenhouse and residential heating. The annual energy production from these types of residues has been estimated at 0.01 PJ/year.
Rice husk residue is used to produce the heat needed by the rice-processing factories and the thermal energy produced has been estimated at 0.09 PJ/year. There is also a factory using rice husk for power production with an installed capacity of 0.44 MWe.

Potential Bioenergy Applications in Greece include:


Small- to medium-scale heat generation or co-generation in agro-industrial mills.
District heating applications in central-northern high-elevation villages.
Co-firing with lignite in existing power stations.
Hybrid solar and biomass, in the tourist sector (hotels, apartments).
Heat generation for individual buildings (schools, hospitals, public buildings). Improved stoves for households based on the different fuel types available in Greece (olive kernels, fruit kernels).



Main Applications/Target Markets


Greenhouse heating: In areas of Greece where there are large quantities of biomass available, biomass is used as a fuel in suitably modified boilers for greenhouse heating.


Heating buildings with biomass fuel in individual/central boilers: In certain areas of Greece, individual/central boilers using olive pits are used to heat buildings.


Hotels and resorts: Offers green credentials to hotel or resort operators, may be financially competitive in remote locations. Winter/autumn/spring tourism is growing in several Greek mountain locations and the technology can be used in some agro and ecotourism developments. These locations have extensive forests and wood industries generating residues.

Production of energy in agricultural industries: Biomass for energy production is used by agricultural industries where biomass is produced in significant quantities as a residue or byproduct of the production process and which have large heat requirements. Ginning mills, mills producing refined olive oil from the second pressing, rice mills, as well as small canning plants burn their residues (residues from cotton ginning, olive pits, husks and seeds, respectively) to cover their heating needs and/or part of their electricity requirements.


Energy production in woodworking industries: residues from woodworking industries (sawdust, powder, shavings) are used for heat in their production processes as well as for heating their buildings. Some 20-30 sites in Greece with more than 1MWth heat only plant could be retrofitted with cogeneration.


District heating: Supply of space heating as well as hot water for a complex of buildings, a residential area, a village or town from a centralized heat production plant. The heat is transported through a network of pipes from the station to the buildings to be heated. This offers local authorities and communities green credentials and, most important, contributes to the local economy. Mountain villages throughout Greece have extensive forests and wood industries generating residues. Conversion of existing traditional wood fires/stoves plus some household oil-fired central heating systems is an attractive option.


Source: Centre for Renewable Energy Sources (CRES).



www.cres.gr











A Biomass Overview
Mechanical Engineer Anastasios Christoforides, Energy & Environmental Auditor at Alteren - Energy & Environment S.A. in Thessaloniki provided ELKE e-News with an overview of the Biomass Heating Application Market in Greece.

Biomass Heating Application Market

The Biomass heating market can be classified by the end-use application of the technology. The three major markets in Greece are: (a) process heat applications ( institutional and commercial buildings and © community energy systems.

Process Heat Applications

Many industrial biomass-heating plants are used to provide process heat to several industries, especially in those sectors where biomass waste is produced. These include sawmills, cotton-ginning plants, furniture manufacturing sites, and drying sites for agricultural processes. Industrial processes usually require substantial quantities of heat year round, thus justifying the higher capital costs of biomass heating through substantial savings in fuel costs. Figure depicts an industrial application of biomass heating at a cotton-ginning house. These applications benefit from having skilled labor on-site, loading and storage infrastructure, and free feedstock material.

Biomass combustion systems are often well suited to industrial process loads. Many industrial process loads have constant heat requirements and biomass heating systems operate most efficiently, and with the fewest operational challenges, when they supply a relatively constant quantity of heat, near their rated capacity, throughout the year. This also maximizes fuel savings by displacing a large amount of expensive conventional fuel, justifying the higher initial capital and ongoing labor costs of the system.

Moreover, the recent emphasis on renewable energy resources as replacements for conventional fuels, spurred by concerns about Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions, is causing a resurgence of interest in biomass heating especially at industrial sector.

Institutional and Commercial Buildings

Individual buildings can satisfy their heating requirements with biomass combustion systems. Since substantial fuel savings must be achieved in order to offset the higher initial costs and annual labor operational requirements of the biomass system, it is rare that a building as small as an individual house would use a biomass heating plant as described in the previous sub-section. Rather, biomass heating is found in institutional buildings such as monasteries in Mount Athos region, military camps; municipal or commercial buildings in mountain areas near forests; and even agricultural buildings, such as greenhouses.

Community Energy Systems

Community energy systems make use of a biomass heating plant and a district heating system to service clusters of buildings or even an entire community. Such community energy systems can provide space heating, heating of ventilation air, water heating, and process heat. These can be supplied to individual buildings, such as institutional (e.g. hospitals, schools, sports complexes), commercial (e.g. offices, warehouses, stores), residential (e.g. apartments) and industrial buildings. They can also provide heat to individual homes, especially if the houses are newly constructed and in groups.



http://www.elke.gr/newsletter/newsletter.a...1&id=428&lang=1

Cow fart (or dump) cannot take you to stars.

Humanity must keep researching nuclear energy especially fusion. Controllable fusion will solve all the energy problems of the planet and controllable fussion cannot be achieved as long as nuclear energy is more widely used and researched.

I dont want to be misunderstood tho, every bit of cow dump is a national resource and if we dont use it for obtaining energy some lower life forms called bacteria and plants will do it instead of us..

LOL @ Beleg

Anyway I think the problem also isnt the technological limits. There are many alternatives for energy. The problem is partly also human habit, which energy source will we except and willing to apply on large scale and the large industries willing to support/promote on massive scale. Currently the oil companies are powerfull and oil enjoys support from both public and politicans. We need a bit mentality/perspective change.

I have no objection to that Cid.. But i believe true future energy is nuclear to the core(fusion not fission!).. We will master the forces stored between Protons and Neutrons, which is far greater than Electrons(cow fart,dinosour/bacteria extract,fern fossil,absolut vodka etc etc) can ever provide.. If we want to colonise space, which we do because of our expansive genetical and natural habbits, we must master this science.. It may sound too science fiction but science fiction becomes the reality too fast..

Anyway i will watch this thread with big interest ..

Beleg, do you have any further, more detailed, information on nuclear energy ?

Sure;

http://www.world-nuclear.org/ is a great site for learning about nuclear energy and its future.


here is an article about future of nuclear energy from the same site;

The parts i marked with bold are actually similar to my views on matters of alternative energy. Cow fart is CH4 and causes greenhouse effect, hydroenergy has disasterous effects on envirement, wind energy? not sustainable yet, so is solar energy.. but they must be pursued..

--------------


a link about thorium fission reactors which will be a leap in safer and cleaner reactors with almost no radioactive waste.

http://www.cavendishscience.org/bks/nuc/thrupdat.htm


--------------

You fear radiation and accidents dont you? So do i.. We all saw Chernobil and we dont want it to repeat again.. But take a look at this and think again about radioactivity;

Scary uh?

But take a look at fusion,
It takes 2 Hydrogen (H) atoms and combines them to create Helium Atoms(He) . It creates an incredible amount of energy, which fuels the sun and the H bomb.
the waste product is not radioactive and can be used industrially since its very difficult to obtain He on Earth(escapes from earths gravity into space).

More info on Fusion reactors, and why they should be built can be read here ;

http://www.iter.org/index.htm

and BBCs news about this project dated Nov 2004 ;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4044895.stm


Conclusion;
Although i respect peoples effort on finding cheaper ways of energy, most of these are unfortunately C emmitters and will not be ecological to use in the long run. Our aim must be a clean safe form of energy in this nothing beats Solar power (especially if it can be collected in space and directed to earth) and Nuclear fusion. They are both challenging but they are crucial .

I love this Thread....Great responses Gents

Now...

Indeed very good info 123-t...But unfortune our GoV is sleeping...till now


@Beleg...

Iam not against cheap energy..whatever its form could be...But given the fact that i was born in Germany and grow up as an teeny at the 80s...i learned to be against any Nuclear Power... :dunno:
If a Cow Pfurt could reach us to Mars..why we shouldnt use it...? lol
Now serious i have to read the very interesting links you provided first...and than judge...
another paradigm would and could be that he 3 world countrys could use cheaper energy..without ..using the Oil that we need...? categorizing power...? Or Cars could drive with Ethanol...Industrie with Nuclear power...Homes with solar energy and wind and so on...


Regards ...just some thoughts

Lord , anything that is based on burining C based fuels is bad for our planet. We are killing more trees,single celled photosynthesis bacteria every passing day. CO2 levels have reached near record levels in worlds history. Unfortunately although the big guys try to minimise emmission of CO2 and other Greenhouse effect gases, Developing countries need more energy and the most readily available form is petrol(dinosour / bacteria extract)/ CH4 aka natural gas or cow fart.. When you realise China + India will be a greater energy user (thus the greatest polluters) than USA+EU in merely 20-25 years it becomes clear that we cant continiue using even the cleaner fuels like Eurodiesel or natural gas like today... The effects of global warming will be disasterous if we go on like this..Also any shortage of these resources will effect global economy tremendously.

Indeed the catogorisation will be necessary like you suggest and like Pytheus said every home must be able to produce its own energy, connected to a smart network, energy efficiency must be increased, standards set maybe worldwide..

We need to buy time until we can efficiently use Solar Power and Fusion Power , first in portable (via efficient batteries) and large scale applications and the second in large scale applications.

Its a nice thread i hope goes on like this.

Yes indeed...

Now i can recal that i read somewere...that back in the 50s even there were an experiment made...something about an micro nuclear devise...(i dont even know if it was an nuclear devise or something else...) that could give any house independence and clean energy...i have to search for it ...it was in the size of a modern Pc...

Regards

The Energy Market

Status Quo and Long Term

The Public Power Corporation (PPC) was established in 1950. Its main purpose was to produce and transmit electrical power. At present, the electricity sector operates under the Directive 96/92/EC which covers deregulation of the electricity market and Greek Law 2773/1999 "Liberalization of the Electricity Market-Regulation of Energy Policy Issues and Other Provisions".

The PPC plays a key role in the Greek electricity market, because it has exclusive exploitation rights for the lignite fields and has negotiated low prices for natural gas.


With respect to the trading of electricity, it should be noted that with the bordering Balkan countries (Albania, FYROM and Bulgaria) there are connections, capable of meeting on an annual basis, electric power transactions higher than 7% of Greece’s needs. These are derived mainly from the surplus of the Bulgarian and Romanian
systems.

The submersible link with Italy via a 400 kV direct-current cable has a transmission capacity corresponding to 500 MW and was commissioned in 2002. Additional connections with FYROM and Turkey are under construction.

The demand for electric energy in Greece in the last few years has resulted in a greater rate of growth compared to the average increase in Europe. The increase in the rate of demand is likely to continue, as the per capita consumption of electricity in Greece is considerably lower than the European mean average, and PPC charges are the lowest in Europe.



According to the Ministry of Development the annual rate of increase in demand for electricity by 2005 is expected to be approximately at 4% for the interconnected system and 5.5% for the autonomous island systems and thereafter will follow
a flat 3.6% for the whole country. Based on this scenario it is estimated that by 2010 the needs of Greece will total 72 TWh.

Electricity produced from renewable energy technologies is a high priority in the European Community, for reasons related to security and diversification of energy supply, environmental protection and social economic cohesion. Greece has taken steps to promote the installation of power plants using renewable energy sources (RES). In terms of production, RES electricity production (including large hydro plants) increased from 1.77 TWh in 1990 (5.1% of total electricity generation) to 4.15 TWh (7.8%) in 2000 and to 6.39 TWh (11.85%) in 2003. In terms of installed capacity, the wind energy sector made outstanding progress over the last five years and wind turbine installed capacity reached 490 MW by the end of 2004.



According to Research Assessment Exercise increased investor interest in hydro and wind energy generation is high because of sufficient availability of renewable energy sources in select regions of Greece. Furthermore, hydro and wind energy generation technology is moderately mature and the relatively high subsidy (40% and 30% of installation costs plus additional subsidies for connection costs), make it more appealing to investors.

The development of other RES is slower. The installation of a new power plant on the Island of Mytiline which exploits geothermal power was approved and additional proposals for the use of geothermal power for electricity generation are currently under revision by Research Assessment Exercise. However, geothermal energy development is expected to be promoted by the application of Law 3175/2003, which encourages the exploitation of geothermal sources.

As far as the biomass sector is concerned, the first power stations in Greece producing electrical energy from biomass have already been constructed with a capacity of 24MW. The recycling of municipal waste will result in a capacity of about 100 MW and may be operational by 2006.


http://www.elke.gr/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=1259

Renewable Energy Sources

Greece has remarkable wind energy resources. Renewable energy sources can be developed at competitive costs. The government’s targets along with the opening of the electricity market will provide tremendous opportunities and will create substantial future wind energy investment.



The government’s target alone will mean an investment of EURO 750 million in the coming years.The Government’s renewable energy policy is driven by:

Kyoto Protocol - targets are legally binding
Overall EU target: by 2010, limit annual greenhouse gas production to 8% below 1990 levels
Greece’s renewables obligation target for the year 2010 is a share of 20.1 %
The Greek sustainable energy policy ensures security of supply, while protecting the environment and maximizing efficiency of generation. At the same time, it emphasizes the use of renewable energy, promotes a culture of energy conservation and minimises emissions of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants (clean generation and sustainable consumption).

Although Greece is still at the initial stages (with more than 200 MW) along with France, Austria, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden and England as compared to
leaders in wind energy such as Germany, Denmark and Spain, at the end of 2004, Greece had generated 490 MW from renewable energy sources.


http://www.elke.gr/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=2471






Solar Energy

The prospects of further development of solar system applications in Greece are good considering the size of the estimated potential market. Some years ago, twenty percent of 4 million consumer households, used a solar system to produce hot water. The rest used mainly electric boilers.


Today, Greece is one of the countries most successful in its use of solar thermal energy. For many years, the number of installed parks of solar collectors per capita has been the highest in Europe as indicated in the graph.

According to the Greek Solar Industry Association, the determining factors in the successful utilization of solar thermal are:

The conventional source of water heating is electricity, with higher costs than fuel oil or gas, leading to shorter payback periods for solar systems.
Most houses have a flat roof, enabling the easy installation of an inexpensive thermosiphonic water heater.
Favourable climatic conditions.
State support during the start-up phase of solar thermal.
Involvement of dedicated individuals at the early stages of solar thermal.


It is estimated that by 2010 more than 5 million sq.m. of solar collectors will be installed for household use. New technologies developed for production, materials and methods are resulting in improved efficiency of thermal collectors while reducing the cost of the system.

The decrease in 2002 is partially explained by the withdrawal of subsidies. The only incentive that existed for the installation of home solar systems was removed at the end of 2002 and consisted of an income tax deduction of 75% of the total installation cost.

According to Eurostat’s Final Report by CRES, "Collection of Statistical Data on Solar Energy Applications in Greece", 45 manufacturers of solar collectors are active, producing more than 300,000 m2 of collectors annually. Imports of solar collectors are limited to almost 5,000 m2 annually. Greece has significant solar potential because of its climatic conditions. The use of solar systems for meeting heating and cooling needs is of great importance to the energy system. It has also developed a dynamic industry, therefore making solar systems an important choice for the Greek economy.


http://www.elke.gr/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=2473




Photovoltaic (PV)

An EU report, "Photovoltaic 2010" indicates that Greece has enough potential to meet one-third of its energy requirements using PV. In 2004, about 900 kilowatts of PV-Systems were installed, mainly in autonomous systems for the mobile communication sector with an annual turnover of about 8 million EURO. The use of solar energy in Greece has very high potential because of high solar radiation, high energy consumption in summer due to tourism and air conditioning, along with growing energy needs in both rural areas and on the islands.



The market is still made up mainly of small companies (about 40). The largest PV
companies install 20-250 KWp per year, while the size of the market during the last 3-4 years has been in the order of 200-900 KWp/a. Recently, there have been signs of change in market size and in strategic direction, as well.

A market survey (concluded in early February 2004) by the Greek Association of Photovoltaic Companies (HELAPCO) has shown that the installed PV capacity in Greece was in the order of 2.37 MWp in late 2002, and reached 3.25 MWp by the end of 2003.

In comparison to other European countries Greece meets most of the conditions for the development and application of photovoltaic systems. State agencies, industry and the tourism industry intend to install photovoltaic systems. This will lead to an impressive rate of growth of photovoltaic systems in the next few years.


http://www.elke.gr/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=2474



Biomass

Biomass is defined as any material derived from living organisms. More specifically,
biomass for energy purposes is any kind of material that can be used for the production of solid, liquid, and/or gas fuels.




In Greece, biomass RTD is managed by the Centre for Renewable Energy Sources (CRES). In 2004, installed capacity in Greece was 24 MW. The local authorities
(municipalities) as well as some industries intend to invest in biomass systems, which will result in an impressive growth over the next coming years.

The biomass industry differs from many other renewables in that it encompasses both the farming and forestry communities and the power generation industry. This creates tensions and misunderstandings.

The industry is still looking at forms of cooperation to deal with these differences that provide equitable returns for both sides of the industry. Biofuels can also be used for transportation.

The most common ones on the market are biodiesel, methyl ester which is produced mainly from oil seeds (sunflower, rapeseed, etc.) and can be used either on its own or in a mixture with diesel for diesel engines. Bioethanol is produced from plant sugars, cellulose and starches (wheat, corn, sorghum, sugar beets, etc.) and is used either alone or in specially adapted gasoline engines, in a mixture with gasoline in regular gasoline engines, or is converted into ETBE (a gasoline additive). In Greece there are two experimental projects, in the areas of Kilkis and Magnesia.

The market prospects for biomass in Greece are increasing, mainly because of great interest of the engaged sectors of the economy and the financial support for green energy provided by EU Structural Funds, the investment incentives from the Greek Government.

The Greek Ministry of Rural Development and Food also provide funds, under the reformed Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) of EU, for the cultivation of specific plants for production of biofuels.

http://www.elke.gr/default.asp?V_DOC_ID=2475

The problem with nuclear energy is, like already mentioned, the acceptance in the public debate, especially in Germany, where they decided to close down all nuclear plants until 2021.


In the majority of the population an anti-nuclear atmosphere has been created (also through stimulating old fears concerning Chernobyl).
This has lead to a counterproductive ambience towards new technologies in the field of nuclear studies.

The crazy thing is that with this new technology no waste will be produced any more and a diversified energy mixture is crucial in times of energy problems...

Record in RES use compares favorably
Most EU member states, including Greece, are still far from achieving the target of producing 12 percent of primary energy production from renewable energy sources (RES) by 2010, according to the European Commission’s latest survey in the field. Greece’s record was 5.24 percent in 2004, but its rank among the 25 is relatively satisfactory as 14 states were below 5 percent — of which seven were below 2 percent. Only five countries, Latvia, Sweden, Finland, Austria and Portugal, have already attained the target. The Commission predicts that at best the rate will rise to 9 percent in the Union as a whole by 2010.

Greece’s wind parks totaled a capacity of 465 megawatts at the end of 2004 and the country ranked in ninth position. Germany was first with 16,629MW and Spain second with 8,263MW. Europe accounts for 73 percent of the global production of wind power. As regards solar energy, the EU produces 10 percent of the world’s total installed panel area, and Greece is second among member states, with 2.82 million square meters.

Greece’s installed hydroelectric power capacity from small stations in 2004 rose 57.3 percent to 70MW, more than in any other member state, but the country is far behind other partners (the capacity of the big stations of the Public Power Corporation is not included).

The Commission is funding new wind parks totaling a capacity of 15,000MW and small hydroelectric power plants with a total capacity of 2,000MW in the 2005-2008 period


http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_artic...0/01/2006_65401

According to Milliyet, in his visit to Brasil, Foreign Minister Gul announced that Turkey and Brasil are planning to work together on alternative fuels. In my opinion, it is more like "let the friends see us shopping" (dostlar alisveriste gorsun). On the other hand, I remember reading Turkey was the third in Europe to use bio-diesel.

http://www.milliyet.com.tr/2006/01/21/siyaset/axsiy01.html

Eurobarometer survey on energy





BRUSSELS (ANA-MPA/M. Aroni) - Greeks believe that decisions concerning energy issues should be taken more on a European rather than on a national level, while the use of solar energy for Greeks is the best solution for reducing dependence on the import of energy sources, according to a Eurobarometer survey on energy issues.

Furthermore, almost one in two Greeks would use their car less frequently if the price of fuel reached two euros per litre.

According to data released on Tuesday by the European Union's "Eurobarometer", 61 per cent of Greeks believe that the decisions on energy issues should be taken on a European level, 31 per cent that they should be taken on a national level and six per cent on a local level. The result of the European public opinion poll shows Greeks first, after the Cypriots, among the Europeans who want the decision on energy issues to be taken on a European level. In Europe, 47 per cent of Europeans declare that they desire the decisions on energy issues to be taken on a European level, 37 per cent on a national level and eight per cent on a local level.

Furthermore, Europeans (48 per cent) and more so Greeks (70 per cent) believe that solar energy is the best solution for reducing dependence from the import of energy sources.

In the event that the price of fuel reaches two euros per litre, 48 per cent of Greeks and 50 per cent of Europeans declare that they would use their car less frequently.


http://www.ana.gr/anaweb/user/showplain?ma...88383&service=8

Green energy investment
CHRYSSA LIAGGOU

The Public Power Corporation will commit 1 billion euros in the next eight years to alternative energy sources. Its aim is to more than double its share in renewable energy sources (RES) from 10 percent today to 23 percent in 2014.

PPC will cooperate in this ambitious plan with the sector’s big players. The main part, however, will be played by its subsidiary, named PPC Renewable Energy Sources, which is being restructured to become more flexible with the aim to be listed in the stock market in the future.

In the last 25 years PPC has effectively abstained from the RES market, despite being the first company to get involved. All this time it has only operated 74 megawatts (from wind parks and small hydroelectric units) against 747MW of total production from RES.

The new administration of the corporation is for the first time looking at the sector with a strategic intention, assessing the market’s momentum and PPC’s advantages. This will also be the first market where PPC will expand jointly with private partners who have considerable shares and expansive investment plans, and with major European companies that have included the Greek RES market in their strategy.

Such partnerships of the country’s main power supplier with strong domestic and foreign investors are expected to provide the boost required for the RES market. The PPC management has not decided yet on how it will cooperate with private partners as it is studying various ideas, such as the entry of a strategic investor in the PPC subsidiary or the setup of appropriate consortia with different investors.

According to sources, the big local players of the market (Rokas, TERNA, Kopelouzos) and some foreign ones such as Electricite de France and Edesa from Spain are expecting the PPC board’s decision for joint investments to proceed. Discussions have been completed with all of the above groups; well-informed sources suggest the private sector’s interest for partnerships has been decisive in PPC going ahead with the expansion in RES.

The project relies on a study conducted by PPC internally, taking into account the target for RES-produced energy in 2010 to cover 20 percent of demand. There are two alternative scenarios: The first comes from the Development Ministry and provides for 3,000MW by the end of 2010. The second comes from the Southeastern Europe Energy Institute (IENE) and plans for a minimum of 2,000MW and a maximum of 3,750MW in the same period.

With both these scenarios as well as the strategic plans of major groups in the local market and the permits for installing 420MW secured, PPC has drafted a plan for additional production of 1,600MW from RES by 2014. This is a PPC investment of about 1 billion euros co-funded up to 30 percent by the Competitiveness Program.

When the investments are completed PPC will have secured a market share of 23 percent, the study suggests, rendering it a key RES player. Competent PPC officials appear optimistic about the plan’s course, noting that “it relies on the most conservative models of market growth, foreseeing power levels of 2-3,000MW by 2010.”

Asked why major market players choose PPC as an ally, its officials note the reduction of both sides’ risks and the partnerships created.

The big risk for private parties to date concerns the local communities and the carriage network for RES-produced energy. PPC can add its prestige and overcome such problems. The corporation even intends to offer shares to local authorities, while the joint construction of the carriage network reduces the financial risk for PPC and its private partners.

Such investments will also unblock those in the production domain, observers suggest, noting the partnerships that will emerge. The “green energy” plan will also reduce the cost burdening the PPC for buying pollution rights on a yearly basis.

Most investments concern wind parks, yet some innovative applications are also planned, e.g. the use of inactive lignite mines by installing photovoltaic systems.


http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/news/eco...date=26/01/2006

[INTERVIEW]
Nuclear Energy: Catastrophe or Salvation?
by
Ali Cimen


The short dispute regarding the natural gas crisis between Russia and Ukraine, and the concerns of Russia cutting Turkey's gas supply, has leaded us on an excursion to seek alternative energy sources. There have been many articles, commentaries and analysis forecasting that Turkey could eventually have problems meeting its energy demands. In order to prevent this dilemma, the country needs to spend a considerable part of its budget for energy supply.

In spite of this reality, there is still strong opposition against the respective nuclear energy option, which leads us to discussions of "luck of energy" and how other countries have benefited from it and those who were faced with the same constrains.


Zaman had the opportunity to discuss the situation with experts in the hope of bringing clarity to the questions surrounding this very atomic subject, starting with the very basic question of what nuclear energy is. Prof. Lefteri H. Tsoukalas, Head of the Nuclear Energy Department of Purdue University, Prof. Richard K. Lester and Prof. Andrew Kadak from the Department of Nuclear Engineering at MIT and spokesman of the Energy Nuclear Northeast, which operates a number of nuclear energy stations across America, answered our questions. Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokeswoman, Diane Screnci also gave ZAMAN her definition of nuclear energy.



What are the advantages and disadvantages of nuclear energy?


Tsoukalas: The principal advantage of nuclear energy is that it is very clean. It releases no emissions to the environment. I think of a nuclear power station as a “giant battery.” Commercial nuclear power is the most eco-friendly (I guess we could say “the greenest”) way to generate massive industrial grade electricity. A 1000 MW coal-fired power station burns nearly 3,000,000 tones of coal a year. Its waste includes over 1,000,000 (tons) of CO2 released in the atmosphere and on average staying there for around 400 years. CO2 has a truly GLOBAL impact. It may be emitted in the US or China but it unquestionably leads to global climate change that brings climate volatility and ecological and social hardship particularly to poorer countries which have gotten none of the benefits of its use. Tons of other highly toxic materials are also released including many radioactive substances and heavy metals which are particularly bad for living organisms. Contrast this to a nuclear generating station. Nothing really comes out. On average, 22 tons of high density metal assemblies that hold the nuclear fuel and the byproducts of its use, the so-called “nuclear waste,” have to be replaced every year. The “waste” is indeed highly radioactive and has to be handled with extreme care and with the proper technology. But its radioactivity dissipates rather quickly and 95percent of what is found there can be used as nuclear fuel. It is more appropriate to call the so-called nuclear waste, a “strategic fuel reserve,” since it will no doubt be used as fuel by future generations. The technology exists to separate harmful isotopes from fuel and breed even more fuel than what goes into a reactor. In this sense nuclear power is indeed a renewable form of energy.


Lester: The main advantages of nuclear energy are that nuclear power reactors, once built, are relatively inexpensive to operate, and compared with fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas (which account for about 80percent of the world's energy supplies) they are environmentally benign, producing no acid emissions (sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides) and no carbon dioxide. They thus make essentially no contribution to global warming. The main disadvantages are the high capital cost, the difficulty of disposing of nuclear waste, and the risk that civilian nuclear technology and/or materials may be diverted to weapons uses.


Steets: Its advantages are that we do not burn coal, oil, or natural gas that emit harmful toxic gases that we breath or add to the greenhouse effect and global warming. Another advantage in the US is price stability, which is possible since nuclear power is not tied to price fluctuations caused by supply or transmission constraints as are foreign-produced oil and natural gas piped long distances across the country. While the radioactive byproduct of nuclear waste can be dangerous if not handled properly, the technology for handling it is well known in the industry and can be safely managed. The biggest disadvantages are the public’s fear or hesitancy that is largely attributable to a lack of understanding of the technology and the often opportunistic political environment which exacerbates that.


Kadak: Advantages are that it is safe and very clean. US nuclear plants have proven that, as too, have nuclear plants in Western Europe, Japan, China, Korea and just about everywhere except in the former Soviet Union where they built different types of reactors which are not as safe (Chernobyl style). Disadvantages are that building a nuclear power station is more costly but the fuel costs are much less which makes nuclear energy more economic in terms of the price of electricity for the long term. The other disadvantages are the public perceptions of nuclear which need to be overcome and the need to dispose of the nuclear waste. At present many countries are making progress in disposal solutions which are known, but no underground disposal site is in operation. The leaders in this field are Sweden, Finland and the US for the first operational repository. In the mean time, the small amount of material is stored on site in storage pools or in concrete storage containers.



Is there a clear and present danger that should keep us away from nuclear energy, like the disaster we witnessed in Chernobyl?


Tsoukalas: There is great irony involved here. Nuclear energy is very safe. If properly managed, this is the cleanest and safest way we have to generate industrial-grade electricity. Nuclear energy is highly mythologized. Because the press release for nuclear technology was Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it understandably invokes a lot of apprehension and fear in the public (and of course fascination). There are many forces shaping and maintaining the nuclear myth. Some are simply popular misconceptions and phobias about nuclear power that were reinforced with notorious accidents such as Chernobyl and Three Mile Island. Some are due to the understandable apprehension of nuclear weapons, and of course, some are due to the competition of rival industries. Chernobyl was the worst nuclear accident that could have possibly happened. It is very well studied and understood. Overall, we can say now, nearly 20 years after it happened, on the basis of Science, not myth, that its consequences were primarily local and rather limited. There is NO GLOBAL environmental impact from Chernobyl. At the time it was a local catastrophe, but it had absolutely no global impact. Compared to industrial accidents encountered in the chemical, mining, metals, paper, transportation or even medical industries, Chernobyl is a limited affair. Of course, we must also say, that Chernobyl like Three Mile Island, provided a lot of lessons that have improved the technology and institutional arrangements required for safe nuclear power.


Lester: Each country has different opportunities and constraints when it comes to energy supplies, so it is difficult to generalize. For some countries, for example those with large resources of oil and gas, it may not make much sense to embark on a nuclear program. But for other countries, with few alternatives, nuclear energy may be very important. To answer your question directly, there is no 'clear and present danger' that stands in the way of nuclear energy development. But of course, this is a technology that has an inherent risk associated with it and therefore needs to be managed responsibly and with care.


Steets: US commercial nuclear reactors (used for electricity production) are a different design than Chernobyl with safety features Chernobyl did not have. The plants' structural strengths and safe-design features (low nuclear enrichment levels, diverse and redundant cooling and defense-in-depth safety capabilities), robust security plans and staffing, and federal security support all contribute to the safety of the plants.


Kadak: The most clear and present danger that we are witnessing in my opinion is the prospect of global climate change which is very difficult to reverse. If you chose the right nuclear technology, the safety has been demonstrated for over 40 years, so I would not be as concerned with that as I would be about our environment which is being damaged by fossil fuel burning. Even ‘environmentalists,’ such as Patrick Moore of Greenpeace, believe that we need nuclear energy to avoid these dangers; check him out on the Internet.


Whereas we are aware of the countries that run nuclear power plants without having any problems, why do we see such strong opposition to nuclear energy (as we do in Turkey) in some countries where nuclear energy is debated as an option for energy production?


Tsoukalas: I am not well informed about the nuclear debate in Turkey and risk being way off. But I assume that the comments above about the nuclear mythology also apply to Turkey. Nuclear power is actually an appropriate option for Turkey as it aspires to become a modern economic powerhouse. The country has enormous developmental possibilities, a young and energetic population, an excellent location, great potential for being a full member of the EU, and good possibilities to contribute and benefit from a new wave of prosperity coming to the Middle East. To fulfill this promise, it must have reliable and plentiful industrial-grade electricity. The nuclear power option has to be done well within a long term perspective, but there are interesting examples for Turkey to learn from, such as South Korea and Finland. In South Korea the development of nuclear power brought enormous benefits and advancements to the whole economy of the country as well as individual industries. The Korean construction industry, for example, acquired great skills and technology for construction based on international standards by constructing nuclear power stations. It subsequently expanded in South Asia and even the Middle East and now successfully bid for contracts to build airports, roads, bridges, buildings, and seaports etc, based on that experience. In the last several decades Turkey invested considerable resources in training a number of young scientists and engineers. Although many of them leave the country and make excellent careers abroad, I believe Turkey has the ability to mobilize top quality technical talent, a prerequisite for nuclear power. Nuclear power development requires leadership and long term strategy. It takes some sacrifices, but I cannot think of anything more promising today than investing in nuclear power, particularly when it becomes increasingly clear that global oil and gas production may be reaching a peak and entering irreversible decline.


Lester: The public is generally wary about nuclear power plants, and that is appropriate. But there are also pockets of intense opposition to nuclear power and this is not based on past evidence -- in fact the safety record of the nuclear power industry has been quite good -- but rather on fears of what might happen in the future. These fears are persistent, and they are difficult to address directly, but there is some evidence that that they have diminished over the past decade or so as the global nuclear industry has continued to expand without any accidents causing significant loss of life, and as the public recognizes that other energy sources also carry significant risks. I was very recently in China, for example, where I learned that the number of deaths in that country's coal mines last year was about 6000. Moreover, this was considered a 'good' year, since the historical average has been about 10,000 deaths per year.


Steets: In the US, much of the opposition stems from an entrenched (and misguided) environmental movement that has considerable political influence which has been buttressed by terrorism fears and their willingness to exploit those fears. Had there not been a 9/11, nuclear power would be enjoying support like never before as its safety performance (judged by a federal regulator, the USNRC), environmental and price advantages, and overall efficiency gains have been remarkable in the last ten years.


Kadak: In do not know the situation in Turkey, but in the US, which has the largest nuclear energy program in the world, the public is over 60percent supportive of nuclear with hard opposition of about 15percent. The typical problem that I have seen in the public opinion is a lack of information about the real facts which are not presented either by the industry or the media, and which only focuses on the negatives and without much knowledge.


What do you think is the best option for energy production? If you make a list, what grade would you give nuclear energy?


Tsoukalas: The modern global system has developed since the early 1900s on the premise that economic growth will bring the benefits of science and technology to all people in the world. Great progress has been made in the last hundred some years, maybe not as balanced and even as the world expected, but still a lot remains to be done and we now have ever growing numbers enjoying the benefits of modernity and in so doing, bring prosperity and opportunities for all. The premise of global economic growth, however, has been predicated on our ability to grow the global energy supply. In practical terms, the collateral for global growth has been our ability to grow the supply of oil (petroleum). We now see, however, that the global production of oil faces great geological (depletion) challenges and may not be able to grow much beyond current levels, no matter how much effort we apply. This is a well studied phenomenon known to geologists as “Hubbert’s Peak,” after the American geophysist Marion King Hubbert, who discovered it several decades ago. It really has to do with the finite nature of hydrocarbons and the idiosyncrasies of depletion processes. I am afraid that the world is quite unprepared for global Hubbert’s Peak. At the moment, it appears, although seldom stated as such, that the main mitigation strategy for this historic crisis is to use military means. Nuclear power represents a sound alternative to this. It will take a lot of leadership but the development of global nuclear power may be our best antidote to war and conflict brought about by the geological limitations of fossil fuels. We need all forms of energy to satisfy the world’s quest for prosperity. But for countries with a good pool of top technical talent, economic dynamism and good potential for institutional development, I would rate nuclear power as the best option.


Lester: This is not a very good question. Every energy source has advantages and disadvantages, and those advantages and disadvantages depend very much on the particular circumstances of the application. Are we talking about Anatolia or Manhattan or Cyprus, for example? But the basic message is that the world will need every available energy resource, including nuclear, if it is to meet the rapidly growing demand for energy without inflicting intolerable environmental damage.


Steets: Today, I would give nuclear the top grade, followed by hydro, natural gas, coal (with strict environmental restrictions), and oil. The alternative methods (wind, solar), needless to say, would rank at the top if their reliability and capacity were greater (much, much greater).


Kadak: Nuclear energy would clearly be my number one choice for electricity production since it is safe, clean and a concentrated source of power not requiring a lot of land, such as wind or solar power. Solar has applications for low grade heat and wind only in circumstances where reliable power is not needed or in isolated locations. It really boils down to economics, and right now, the economics of nuclear energy are quite favorable compared to the alternatives.


Do you see some alternative energy sources that may replace the nuclear one in the short term, and what could happen in the long term?


Tsoukalas: Again, we do need all forms of energy. Hydro is the best form of renewable energy. Wind and solar are promising and we should use more of them as well as bio fuels for transportation. In sunny countries, like Greece and Turkey, for example, it is such a great and practical option to heat water with solar energy. But because of thermodynamic and economic considerations most of these options do not scale up to the needs of modern industrial-grade electricity. Unfortunately, in the context of a major energy crisis, some renewable means of generating electricity may be the first to disappear, since they are quite expensive and inherently small scale. In the long term, Hubbert’s Peak will force us to do more with less. The real challenge will be to do this and still have in place a prosperous global economy. Our young people, armed with knowledge of science, will have to come up with new technologies to help us address this challenge. For example we can bring into our energy systems a lot more smart information technology (smart sensors, microprocessors embedded in our home appliances, etc) in order to increase efficiency and minimize waste to the absolute thermodynamic minima.


I have little doubt that nuclear power will see significant application as the world’s growing source of primary energy.


Lester: If the world is to have any chance of avoiding very significant economic and environmental harm from global climate change, it seems inevitable that we will have to have a significant increase in the amount of nuclear power over the next few decades. Without nuclear energy, the numbers simply don't add up, and the massive increase in carbon dioxide emissions that result would very likely cause major economic and environmental disruption. In the longer term -- by which I mean several decades to 100 years -- we may well have renewable alternatives that would be preferable to nuclear power (as well as coal, oil and gas) and that would be available on the necessary scale. But on a shorter time scale -- i.e., by mid-century -- there is essentially no possibility that these alternatives would be able to fill the gap that would be left if the world were to abandon nuclear today.


Steets: None are available in adequate amounts to replace nuclear for a variety of reasons in the short term (cost, capacity and technological limitations, reliability, local opposition), and in the long term should replace older fossil plants rather than the nuclear plants.


Kadak: Long term energy sources are hard to predict since they depend on technology developments and economics. At present, no short term alternatives exist that are economic. I know some countries in Europe are building high priced wind mills as a political gesture but the consumers are paying high prices for it either in taxes or electric bills.



How is nuclear energy acquired?


Nuclear energy is a way of creating heat through the fission process of atoms. All power plants convert heat into electricity using steam. At nuclear power plants, the heat to make the steam is created when atoms split apart – this is called fission. Other types of power plants may burn coal or oil for heat to make steam. The fission process takes place when the nucleus of a heavy atom, like uranium or plutonium, is split in two when struck by a neutron. The “fissioning” of the nucleus releases two or three new neutrons. It also releases energy in the form of heat. The released neutrons can then repeat the process. This releases even more neutrons and more nuclear energy. The repeating of the process is called a chain reaction. In a nuclear power plant, uranium is the material used in the fission process. The heat from fission boils water and creates steam to turn a turbine. As the turbine spins, the generator turns and its magnetic field produces electricity.


Diane Screnci, American Nuclear Regulatory Commission Spokeswoman







30.01.2006
http://www.zaman.com/?bl=commentary&alt=&hn=29190

Greece trails EU in green fuel switch
Experts warn of Kyoto shortfall
Greece is trailing the rest of Europe in adopting renewable energy sources while ignoring natural resources on its islands that could generate enough power for the entire nation, experts said yesterday.

Lawyers, economists, scientists, academics and environmentalists at an Athens University conference slammed the government for failing to actualize any plans to exploit environmentally friendly energy.

Greece has come under pressure for taking too long to draft a power bill at a time when its EU peers seem to be forging ahead in the switch to greener energy.

Nikos Charalambidis, Greenpeace’s director in Greece, pointed out that the Public Power Corporation (PPC) continues to invest in petrol-based energy production despite the record-high prices.

“PPC is ignoring the fact that the sun and wind are two resources which islands offer in abundance — to an extent which the islands could supply energy for the rest of the country,” Charalambidis said.

PPC is the second-largest user of lignite in the European Union and recent data show that coal is likely to fuel its power plants until 2040.

Apart from its damage to the environment, use of the energy source is taking a toll on PPC’s profits.

According to Eftichios Sartzetakis, assistant professor at the University of Macedonia, PPC was billed 69 million euros in the first nine months of 2005 as part of the EU’s emissions-trading scheme.

The scheme, which Greece joined in June, offers companies the ability to emit carbon dioxide in line with set quotas. However, they can buy extra points and up their quotas, if they overshoot targets.

As part of the 1997 Kyoto Agreement, Greece is committed to restricting the increase in emission of carbon dioxide to 25 percent by 2010, in comparison to 1990 levels.

Figures from the Athens Observatory show that Greece will miss the mark and that the increase is likely to come in closer to 40 percent.


http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_artic...9/02/2006_66191

Biofuels Enter the Market
As energy becomes a dominant concern in global markets, policy makers are introducing a variety of programmes to diversify energy sources and expand alternative technologies in energy production. As fossil fuels continue to generate considerably high levels of pollution, EU lawmakers are setting new standards to reduce carbon and other greenhouse gases. One of the most prominent of the alternative sources of energy for transport is biofuels, a sector in which Greece has tremendous potential.

Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament aims to promote the use of biofuels and other renewable fuels to replace diesel or petrol for transport with a view to contribute to objectives such as meeting climate change commitments, environmentally friendly security of supply, and promoting renewable energy sources.

Overall, the percentage of biofuels used in transport must have risen to 5.75% of all fuel consumed by 2010. In Greece, objectives are currently listed in gross tons, with the target of 91,000 tons of biofuels used by the end of 2006, and 190,000 tons by the end of 2007. Currently, Greece's two biofuel plants produce 31,000 tons each.

Greece has recently passed a new law related to biofuels, which calls for tax-free sales of biofuels as well as other incentives. The Directorate for Renewable Fuels and Energy Saving of the Ministry of Development conducted a dialogue with parties involved in the biofuels sector, and reached several significant conclusions:

Of possible biofuels listed in Directive 2003/30/EC, the most convenient ones for Greece are biodiesel and bioethanol. As the handling of biodiesel presents no technical difficulties, the fuel will be marketed through the existing market infrastructure for motor diesel with no need for adjustments. In the first phase it will be blended with motor diesel at the refineries in the percentage of 5% by volume. The blending of bioethanol with petrol does create challenges so that bioethanol will be converted at the refineries into ETBE, a suitable chemical combination, instead of MTBE. Bioethanol can be converted into ETBE at the existing MTBE production units of the refineries after making slight modifications. This technique is applied widely in Spain, Italy, France and other EU countries.

The estimate for the consumption of motor diesel for the period 2005 to 2010, based on regression analysis, indicates that some 148,000 tons of biodiesel will be required to meet the target of 5.75% for 2010.

Currently, there are two plants producing biodiesel in Greece, one in Kilkis run by Hellenic Petroleum, and one in Volos run by ELIN. Both have an output of 31,000 tons.

The estimate for petrol consumption also indicates that 390,000 tons of bioethanol will be required to meet the 5.75% target for 2010.

Biodiesel is produced by esterification (converting to esters) from vegetable oils (and animal oils) and methanol, with glycerin as a by-product, and bioethanol is produced from raw materials rich in hydrocarbons. Greece has a large number of crops that can be used for the production of biodiesel. Sunflower and cottonseed oil are expected to play an important role along with rape seed oil, which is considered highly suitable. In addition, tobacco oil and tomato oil are very promising raw material alternatives. Sweet sorghum, which has a higher bioethanol yield per hectare than sugar beets, is expected to play an important role in the production of bioethanol and trials have demonstrated that sorghum thrives throughout Greece. Considerable expanses of land, from 400,000 hectares up to 10,000,000 hectares, will need to be cultivated to meet the demands of biofuel use.

Experts agree that Greece is in a position to produce excellent and competitively priced biofuels for domestic consumption and export. This is especially true for bioethanol due to the lower cost of raw materials. In fact, Greece has shown a strong interest in the development of biofuels for decades. From 1985 to 1996, Greek scientists participated in 20 of 70 EU projects on researching liquid biofuel and Greece was lead project directors of five.

The biofuels market provides an entirely new area for development and investment, which includes the agricultural, manufacturing, trading, and retail sectors. It also provides opportunities for new synergies in industry. For instance, in Germany the auto giant VW has teamed up with Shell to produce biofuels jointly and in Sweden, Saab is producing cars that operate only with bioethanol and Ford is involved in a similar project. In Brazil, the production of cars that can use any kind of biofuels has exceeded the production of conventional automobiles. Greece's farming community is showing a strong interest in growing crops for biofuels production and believes that the market will grow at a rate to support sustained production over many decades.

Biofuels are liquid fuels that can be used for transportation. The most widely used biofuels on the market are:

Biodiesel.
Methylester, usually produced from seeds (rape seed or sunflower) that can be used alone or mixed with diesel in diesel engines.
Bioethanol produced from sugar beets, corn, and sweet sorghum can be used alone or mixed with regular gasoline or as an additive in specially-designed gasoline engines
Advantages of Using Biofuels
The use of biofuels is an effective way of reducing the gas emissions responsible for the greenhouse effect and for addressing global climate change. Production of these alternative fuels is creating new opportunities for employment in agriculture and forestry, investment in new technology, and in the development of cleaner, more efficient industries using natural resources. From a technical standpoint, existing fuel installations can be modified to use biofuels.



http://www.elke.gr/newsletter/newsletter.a...4&id=500&lang=1

Martin Platz of PLATZ Ingenieure GmbH
Martin Platz of PLATZ Ingenieure GmbH, discusses the opportunities he sees to invest in the biofuels sector in Greece. The German engineering firm is cooperating with ELKE to establish itself in the Greek market and to take advantage of the attractive investment incentives in Greece.

How has your cooperation with the Hellenic Center for Investment assisted you in the Greek market?

ELKE, with its well structured and “to-the-point” homepage on the Internet (www.elke.gr), its well-trained professionals and energy team, has been, and still is, of great help to PLATZ in understanding and transcribing Greek customs and legal prerequisites.

What activities are PLATZ involved in?

PLATZ Engineers is a construction engineering company based in several locations in Germany, with a Partnership in Graz, Austria. We have been in business for more than ten years and work solely with highly-experienced engineers and architects. Our core business consists of Automation, building-engineering including IT, architecture, consulting, and project development. We try to offer a full scope of engineering disciplines, with an emphasis on industrial projects, and we try to give the customer the care he is looking for, with short links in between the necessary planners of an industrial installation. We find that a close net of specialized engineers complement one another. Our customers, such as BMW; Siemens; Audi; European Patent Office, learned that close methods of communication minimize differences of the involved members of the planning team add to the quality of a planning procedure. Our specific expertise was gained in designing a power plant run on rape-oil and a bio-diesel refinery in Austria.

How do you view Greece as a FDI location?

Greece as a potential investment location offers a variety of advantages for a project like the biodiesel-plant. Northern Greece has a high level of sun-energy connected with a strong but still expandable agrarian industry. Therefore, we see high potential in gaining raw materials needed for the production of biofuels. The infrastructure is more than sufficient and the workforce, although skilled, can benefit from new fields of development.

Having a Greek IT-engineer coming from Grevena on our team, with his inside knowledge of the area, adds to our interest in this specific location.

What stage are you at now?

Presently we are assembling the support materials and documents needed (that are, very conveniently, mostly defined on ELKE’s homepage) for introducing a biofuel refinery in the area of Grevena.



http://www.ping-gmbh.de


http://www.elke.gr/newsletter/newsletter.a...4&id=501&lang=1

Advanced Energy Technologies S.A.
The search for alternatives to petroleum-based energy sources is spurring research and development efforts throughout the world. Scientists in Greece are very much part of the quest for advanced technologies that will lessen our dependence on petroleum and will usher in a new era of pollution-free energy.

Advanced Energy Technologies S.A. develops new materials and systems, such as fuel cells and photovoltaic systems, for renewable energy sources. The major effort of this start-up company focuses on a prototype high temperature PEM fuel cell system based on Advent's proprietary technology.

The company, founded by researchers from FORTH-ICEHT and the University of Patras, is a spin-off operation from these two academic institutions and is funded by industrial partners (Germanos, S.A., Velti S.A, ILPRA S.A.), private investors, and the Greek Ministry of Development under the PRAXE B programme for matching capital. Advent Technologies is headquartered in Athens and occupies approximately 200 m2 of research and development space at the Patras Science Park (PSK). Advent says the PSK location is an ideal location for technology development due to its proximity to academic institutions, and its excellent infrastructure capabilities.

The use of fuel cells allows for the significant reduction of greenhouse gases produced by current conventional fossil fuel technology or absolutely eliminates emissions by the use of renewable energy hydrogen. Hydrogen produced by water electrolysis via photovoltaic, hydro- and wind- power is an absolutely clean fuel for fuel cells with zero greenhouse gas emissions. Having this in mind, the United States government committed in January 2003 a total of $1.7 billion over the following five years to develop hydrogen and fuel cell technologies. Japan is also aggressively pursuing the research and demonstration of hydrogen and fuel cells with a budget estimated at around $240 million. The initiatives demonstrate that the market potential for fuel cell technology is huge. For instance, in Japan alone 50,000 PEMFC vehicles are expected to be operational by 2010, a number that will increase to 5,000.000 in 2020 and to 15,000.000 in 2030. Regarding stationary applications, it is estimated that the installed capacity of PEMFC units will reach 2,100.000 Kw by 2010, 10,000.000 Kw by 2020 and 15,000.000 Kw by 2030.

Fuel cells are a technology that has not yet come to full market presence. The most popular PEM fuel cell technology is based on NAFION® polymer proton conductor (a DuPont product) sandwiched between two gas diffusion electrodes, which are mainly based on nanostructured Pt/C supported electrocatalysts. However, the high cost of NAFION® and the constraints set due to the low operating temperature (CO poisoning, ineffective exploitation of heat produced) are incentives for the design and development of materials (polymer electrolytes and electrocatalysts) that will allow the operation of PEM fuel cells at temperatures ranging from 130o to 200oC.

Advent competes in the membrane sector by producing cost-effective, high-temperature proton conducting membranes that solve the problems of competing efforts, and offers membranes with very good mechanical properties, high thermal and oxidative stability, and high ionic conductivity. In addition, the company has the capability to combine the membrane and electrode technologies and the necessary engineering expertise to produce an integrated final fuel cell system.



Headquarters: Leof. Kifisias 44, Marousi Athens, 15125
T: +30 210 689 8900 F: +30 210 682 4766
Research laboratories: Patras Science Park, Rio 26504.
T: +30 2610 961 220-2 F: +30 2610 961 225
Web page: http://www.adventech.gr
E-mail: info@adventech.gr




http://www.elke.gr/newsletter/newsletter.a...4&id=502&lang=1

Europeans say ‘yes’ to alternative energy sources, but not if it means making big changes in their lifestyles
Despite EU survey showing popularity of green policies, consumers still reluctant to abandon cars for public transport


Most Europeans are not daunted by lengthening traffic jams, hours spent sitting in their cars and a degraded environment.
By Tania Georgiopoulou - Kathimerini

Europeans are all in favor of renewable energy sources — as long as they do not impinge upon their habits and, above all, do not affect their use of their cars, according to a recent European Union survey.

Energy is both heavily used and is also extremely expensive. It has been estimated that by 2030, 70 percent of Europe’s energy requirements, which are increasing by 1-2 percent a year, will be imported. Europeans’ dependence on mineral fuels for producing energy will amount to 90 percent of the total, with a resulting increase in greenhouse gas emissions.

A changeover to alternative sources will require the consent of the public, which prompted the European Commission to investigate the attitudes of the public in the 25 member states on EU energy policy.

Nearly half (47 percent) of those surveyed would prefer that decisions related to energy production and the ensuing release of gases that lead to climatic change be taken at European level. Over a third (37 percent) believe that these decisions need to be taken at national level and 8 percent at local level.

Most said they would prefer alternative sources in order to help the environment and appeared willing to learn how to use less energy.

Almost half believe that national governments should fund these alternative sources — 41 percent favor solar energy, 31 percent wind energy. Less popular was the idea of introducing laws to reduce the dependence on mineral fuels (with just 23 percent in favor). Meanwhile, just 12 percent favored greater use of nuclear energy.

Most say they would like to consumer less energy, particularly if it means paying lower energy bills, but are unsure as to how to go about it. Forty-three percent would like to learn more about how to save energy and 40 percent would support steps to conserve energy.

Eight in 10 seriously consider energy consumption when buying a product, especially cars and refrigerators, although not as much when buying light bulbs.

Interestingly, there is greater concern in the EU’s newer members states about energy consumption. Forty percent of Europeans said they would be willing to pay more for energy production from renewable sources, but when questioned on their willingness to change their daily habits in order to reduce consumption, they are not so sure.

Only two in 10 Europeans said they were willing to use their cars “considerably less often” and just three in 10 “slightly less often.” The Czechs, Slovaks, Poles and Austrians were the most open to changing their car use habits, while the Irish, Cypriots, Maltese and Danes were the least likely to do so.

http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_artic...8/04/2006_68419

Consumers vs the environment
Europeans consume a lot, or perhaps one should say they waste a lot, according to figures from Greenpeace.

* 5-10 percent of the electricity bill in the average household is due to appliances switched to “standby” mode.

*12 percent of the average household income goes on car fuel, less than 2 percent on public transport.

* A new car appears on the world’s roads every second; 4,000 cars an hour, 100,000 a day. Half of the world’s petroleum consumption goes into cars, and 20-25 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions is due to automobiles.

* Waste from packaging materials in the former 15-member European Union amounts to more than 160 kilos per person a year, of which about two-thirds comes from the food industry.

* In order to produce a million tons of plastic bottles, 732,000 tons of greenhouse gases are emitted.

* The production of 2 ton of paper requires two to three times that weight in wood.

* The planet’s forest cover has been reduced by half over the past 8,000 years because of the increased demand for paper and wood, but also the expansion of human activities. Between 1980 and 1995, at least 2 million square kilometers of forest were destroyed, equal to an area larger than Mexico.

* World meat consumption is expected to rise by 2 percent annually in coming years; 43 percent of beef and over half of all pork and poultry is produced on industrialized farms. The increased demand for meat is leading to the cutting down of forests for pasture or soya monoculture for animal fodder.


http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_artic...8/04/2006_68418

Full sail for wind power



Michalis Karamanis ©, head of energy regulator RAE, is optimistic about investments by Dimitris Kopelouzos (l), Lefteris Mytilineos ® and Rokas SA.

By Chryssa Liaggou - Kathimerini

The winds of the Aegean Sea could guarantee the islands a steady power supply, following investment interest in electricity production via wind parks.

Four billion euros in funds, half of which come from abroad, are awaiting the nod of the licensing authorities to support investments that could put an end to the fragmentary and unreliable power network on the islands.

It has taken the Aegean Islands 12 years since the liberalization of the renewable energy sources market in 1994 to become the focus of investment plans for the production of a total of 2,800 megawatts from wind parks.

Such output covers 30-40 percent of the country’s total installed power, with Regulatory Authority for Energy (RAE) President Michalis Karamanis telling Kathimerini that “it borders on the limits of the system,” which means that this is the maximum power that can be absorbed.

Actually even this amount of output is not certain to be absorbed. “This is something we must look into, and maybe we should go beyond the power system operator (DESMHE) and into special consultants,” said Karamanis, adding that “investors may be forced to combine wind parks with pumped-storage electric power plants. Such an investment would allow us to store any excessive power produced at a wind park. Of course, this raises the total cost by 30-40 percent or even 100 percent at times, but if deemed necessary we will demand it of investors before licensing them,” he explained.

He sees the interest in big investments on islands as positive: “Besides securing clean energy, as we will not have to consume oil, we will also avoid the cost of utility services of up to 300 million euros just for the islands,” Karamanis suggested, arguing that such investments are another huge opportunity for the influx of foreign funds, citing the example of the big project by Rokas SA with the 49.9 percent participation of Spain’s Iberdrola.

He thinks that technically the projects planned by Rokas and the Mytilineos and the Kopelouzos groups are feasible both for wind parks as well as underwater connections with the country’s continental network. “Yet there remain some questions about their acceptance by the islanders,” Karamanis noted, referring to an old problem of such investments.

The acceptance of investments by local communities remains one of the risks for investors, who remain optimistic since their relationship with locals has matured.

Rokas SA

“The local communities have responded warmly to our investment plan. They immediately embraced it and we have even received letters of gratitude,” the CEO of Rokas SA, Matthaios Troullis, told Kathimerini. He noted positive the response in Chios, Lesvos and Lemnos, where the company will install 44 wind parks of 1,636 MW, investing 2.4 billion euros.

“These three remote islands suffer most from the poor electricity network. It is nationally imperative that they do not look across the sea to Turkey to resolve their energy problem and with this investment they feel they are solving it. They also look forward to the financial benefits of the 2.5 percent levy on the annual turnover, which is to go to local authorities,” Troullis said.

He also noted the benefits to the environment and the Greek economy in general. “From the oil to be saved, we will benefit by some 1.5 billion euros per year for all islands, not including the advantages in reducing pollution,” he stressed.

The Rokas CEO brands the project “a big challenge, as it is the biggest investment worldwide in the sector, guaranteed technically and financially by Iberdrola.” He added that the project is viable and can be completed within two years from the time it becomes licensed.

Local communities on Andros, Tinos, Syros, Paros and Naxos, where the Kopelouzos group along with that of Samaras are planning an installation of 400 MW, have also accepted the investment with warmth. The plan also provides for a connection with Lavrion in Attica via Syros, totaling 700 million euros.

“We have received the consent of local communities. It was they that first invited us to become active,” said Dimitris Kopelouzos, head of the group. “The Cyclades project respects the environment and is fully included in the DESMHE plan for the development of the Greek network. It serves the interests of the Public Power Corporation, too, as its use relieves PPC of the huge cost of operating local units and the obligation for direct investment in those islands to increase installed power and the rising demand for power,” he argued.

The sole problem, he suggests, is an environmental one. “The determining factor for the studies required is how quickly the Public Works Ministry will act toward their approval,” he stated.

All three groups, however, note the key part played by the framework tabled this month in Parliament in favor of investments. “The law is positive. [Development Minister Dimitris] Sioufas has made a law that favors investments,” said Kopelouzos.

Mytilineos

Executive members of the Mytilineos group are also optimistic about the implementation of their investment plan. They are also taking for granted the consent of local communities, but maintain some reservations as “at any point, even during the investment’s operation, you may run into a problem. This is the great liability of such projects,” they say.

The group is promoting the installation of wind parks of 800 MW on the islands of Milos, Kimolos, Poliaigos and Sifnos and their interconnection with the network at Lavrion, at a total budget of 1 billion euros.

Realizing this investment, a top official at the group suggests, will offer a reliable solution to the islands’ power supply and support for the southern half of the grid which has stability problems.

Notably, all three groups view favorably a partnership with PPC, which has planned the production of 1540 MW of power with a partner, or 770 MW on its own.


http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_artic...0/05/2006_70312

The news appear very promising.



The social, economic and political impact of the project could be huge.

1. Support of rural development
2. Reduction of pollution
3. Creation of employment
4....

One comment on that...

Iam only hoping that this new sources of energy...wont be used as an excuse to rise the bills more...


In Hessen for excamble... they made an issue with the energy firms...
In greece our DAMN DEH....wants to rise the bills again...(double)...
iam shure i will be the next who "blows" them away...and take the mountains...
kolopoustes...gamot thn remoula sas...

the DEH emplys dont pay anything.(or something about 30% )..but the rest pays "normal"...which is huge...

I'm surprised that noone except Beleg mentioned anything about "fusion". All these alternative energy sources listed under this thread are weak when compared to "fusion". Humanity is approaching the realization of "controlled fusion" with every passing day.

I don't know if you followed the recent news on this matter but the highest temperature ever recorded on Earth - more than 2 billion kelvin - has been achieved in plasma created in the "Z machine" at the Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico. The temperature is higher than those found inside stars. Call it dumb-luck if you like, but this is what happened:

Related article: http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-rel...t-z-output.html

The Z-machine:



The plasma temperature soared to more than 2 billion Kelvin, far hotter than the interior of a star, and the exceptional temperature was maintained even after the plasma would usually have stagnated and begun to cool. Most surprising of all, the energy released by the reaction was actually greater than the 20 millions amps of current used to vaporise the core sample, and it is believed that as the plasma forms it is soaking up energy from the separate magnetic field that compresses it.

Now, the challenge is "how to maintain and control this plasma in small-scale and for a longer period of time". Well, I guess they're working on that too...



The above picture shows a design of in-vessel components that will perform satisfactorily in fusion plasma environments based on the interactions of plasmas and materials, the behavior of materials exposed to high-heat fluxes, and the interfaces of plasmas and fusion reactor walls.

Related article: http://www.sandia.gov/eesector/besmfe.html

Think about it... What would happen when they achieve such breakthrough! Mars will be just miles away, to start with... No need for expensive ways and means to produce electricity.... Kiss oil/gas goodbye... You fill in the remaining blanks yourself.

P.S. Other two issues that is being studied by the scientists are the anti-matter and dark matter, i.e. making use of positrons, but we are years away from making them work.

With all due respect, all other alternative energy sources are nothing but just gap fillers until the day controlled fusion, and matter/anti-matter reactions are actually realized.

Exactly.. I wonder when we control fusion, will we need to artifically cool our planet like in Asimovs famous novels.

Did Somebody said he needed some dilitium crystals? :shoot:
Set fasers on stun.

That is a very good question. Cheap and "clean" energy (or, to be scientifically correct: power), while it may sound great, may be the doom of the ecosphere, since heat itself is a byproduct of any kind of power production/consumption, even if the power is generated cleanly, i.e. without undesirable chemical/radioactive byproducts.

Imagine a world with more than 10 billion people whith an average power consumption per capita, let's say twice or three times of today's european average, (since everyone on the planet will be able to afford to consume more power with the falling prices, this could be a reasonable projection in 30to 40 years if fusion is introduced and is as cheap as we think it is going to be ). The worldwide produced excess heat would be tremendous. Even if we manage to reduce the greenhouse effect by using "clean" energy, the more power we produce/consume, the more heat we produce, i.e. the more we alter the balance of the ecosphere.

Even a 1-3 degree celcius permanent change in ocean temperature kills all coral reefs in seas. Devastation would be tremendous if we dont care in that case..