My friends over at the Kellogg Alumni Club are at it again with another great clean tech event. On Wednesday, March 17 the group will host a panel discussion on two emerging clean industries: transportation and energy – including nuclear power. Can that, too, be clean?

The event is open to the public, and it will be a great way to learn and network with leaders. Ideas will definitely be flowing. The top-shelf presenters and panelists include:

Rod Diridon - Clean Tech Rail Pioneer, Executive, Political Leader, and High-Speed Rail Authority Board Member
Bob Garzee - Clean Tech Automotive Transportation Pioneer and Entrepreneur
Jeff Hamel - Energy Researcher and Clean Tech Advocate

Networking, passed hors d’oeuvres and a cash bar start at 6pm, and the presentations and discussion will go from about 7 – 8:30 pm. You couldn’t ask for a better setting: the beautiful McCormick and Kuleto’s – right on the water. See you there!

Click Here For More Information And For Reservations.

Also, remember Kellogg’s San Jose clean tech event with different panelists, Thursday, April 1. Click here for more information on that!

Some power generation facilities store energy during peak hours to later use during off peak hours (and vice versa).  The best example of this is battery storage of energy from wind and solar generators.  Wind and sun generate most of their power during the day, and in the case of solar, there is no energy generated in the evening.  An example of how this process works both ways is in the case of hydroelectric power generation when water is pumped to higher elevations during off-peak hours.  During peak hours the water pumped up is released, and extra power is available.  This method is called “pumped storage.”

These processes result in some energy loss, but proponents say the cost to generate the electricity is minimal, so why not?  For a small hit in efficiency, you get clean, carbon neutral power around the clock.  For the most part, I agree.  Wind, sun and water are in high abundance for power generation, and not an ounce of carbon is produced (though the added wear and tear on equipment eventually leads to shorter life spans, higher maintenance costs, etc…)  This leads to more manufacturing and likely more carbon emissions. Regardless, these methods are all far better than popping up a new coal plant.

Now, add a “new” tool to the tool box.  Compressed Air Energy Storage (“CAES”).  I guess it’s been around for a while in Germany and Alabama, so it’s not so “new.” But it is possibly new to California!   An article from the San Francisco Chronicle on August 27, 2009 details how PG&E is seeking a federal grant of $25 Million to design a facility in Kern County, CA using CAES.  Kern County is about half-way between LA and San Francisco.  The facility would use power generated by solar and wind to pump air into porous rock reservoirs.

Then, at night when the sun’s gone, or on a day when the wind won’t blow, the compressed air is released and generates electricity.  The plant PG&E would like to see would provide 300 MW for 10 hours…that’s enough to power 750 homes.

The total cost of the facility would be about $300 Million over five years.  That may seem like a lot, but when you realize that once it’s up and running there are no added costs for fuel, it starts to make sense.

By 2010, PG&E needs to generate 20% of it’s power from renewables.  They’re not going to make it, but with efforts like this and the recent deal with BrightSource Energy (full disclaimer, BrightSource is a client of Bell, Rosenberg & Hughes, the workplace for the authors of this blog), no one can say PG&E isn’t trying.  According to a recent article in the Sacramento Business Journal, Peter Darbee, CEO and Chairman of PG&E stated PG&E has contracts that will allow the utility to deliver up to 24 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2013.

CAES doesn’t sound ideal, but creativity like this can only lead to better things.  Also, with a carbon credit market likely around the corner, facilities like this may generate unforeseen dividends.

For the San Francisco Chronicle article that includes a great illustration of CAES, click here

For the Sacramento Business Times Article, click here

In honor of Earth Day this week, NPR broadcasted a live debate hosted by Intelligence Squared; the motion on the floor:

Major Reductions in Carbon Emissions are Not Worth the Money.

If you are not familiar with Intelligence Squared, they are a fantastic organization that hosts Oxford style debates live in New York City that are broadcasted to a national audience on NPR. The Oxford format is interesting because the audience weighs in at the outset of the debate and once again after completion, and the “winner” is the side that is able to sway a higher percentage of attendees’ minds.

This heated earth day debate include heavy hitters on both sides:
For the motion: Peter Huber, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute; Bjorn Lomberg, Copenhagen Business School professor and author of The Skeptical Environmentalist; and University of London professor Phillip Stott.
Against the motion: L. Hunter Lovins, founder of The Rocky Mountain Institute and author of Natural Capitalism; Adam Werbach, the youngest ever president of the Sierra Club and San Francisco native; and British journalist Olive Tickell.

I won’t give away the winner because both sides make insightful comments so the debate is definitely worth listening to yourself.

And if you are intrigued by the topic of carbon emissions, another interesting article to read is a NYTimes article on renown scientist Freeman Dyson that has recently sparked controversy and produced a significant amount of feedback from readers.

Recent news have been mainly a dismal affair when it comes to the economy.  One report states that all but five metropolitan cities will suffer major job losses.  Another report states that graduates from top universities are unable to find jobs, despite stellar grades and credentials.

In the midst of all of this, I found one piece of positive news pertaining to jobs in the clean energy sector:

According to Fast Company, a magazine devoted to innovation and technology, the following ten jobs will be in high demand over the next decade as the country continues to increase investment in clean energy:

  1. Farmer - America’s two million farmers, with an average age of 55, will need to be replaced by a larger group of smaller-scale farmers
  2. Forester – deforestation, which has become a leading source of carbon credits worth billions of dollars, will increase the need for foresters skilled in finance, conservation, and development.
  3. Solar Power Installer – greater need for installers if anticipated tax credits are accelerated
  4. Energy Efficiency Builder (LEED) - increased need for specialized architect, engineers, and retrofit workers
  5. Wind Turbine Fabricator – fastest-growing source of alternative energy will create a need for new jobs in this sector
  6. Conservation Biologist – need to preserve the integrity of world’s ecosystems
  7. Green MBA/Entrepreneur – need to assess the “triple bottom line” – People, Planet, Profit
  8. Recycler - create alternatives to high costs associated with disposal
  9. Sustainability Systems Developer – create new software to run clean energy networks
  10. Urban Planner – increasing the use of mass transit, limiting suburban sprawl

Of course, some of the growth in the aforementioned job fields may be contingent upon the passing of President Obama’s $1 trillion economic stiumulus plan, which will provide federal funding for renewable energy, mass transit, construction, and renovation, among other things.