The Chinese government will raise about 180 billion US dollars to develop renewable energy from now to 2020, said a senior official at the Beijing International Renewable Energy Conference that opened here Monday [7 Nov.].

By then, the share of renewable energy in primary energy consumption will stand at 15 percent, rising from the current seven percent, said Zhang Guobao, vice minister of the National Development and Reform Commission.

Renewable energy, including solar, wind power, and hydropower, will contribute to better energy security in China, said Zhang. It also delivers substantial economic and environmental results, alleviating poverty.

China’s economic growth rate is so aggressive, it’s a daunting task to get energy production ahead of demand. But, until they achieve that cushion, it will be difficult to knock down their greatest source of pollution: energy used for home heating and cooking — open coal fires.



  1. Jim Dermitt says:

    Good luck with renewable. Green Mountain Energy recently pulled out of the Pennsylvania market. http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05296/593043.stm
    The state loves pouring cash into this stuff. “All told, the investments of about $40 million — including $9.3 million in state assistance — will substantially increase wind-farm production in the state.” says the Post Gazette story. Then there are the wind farm protesters, who may have a good point, since birds tend to get chopped up by these things. Geothermal may be a far better approach and profitable. http://www.geothermal.org/what.html
    The American Geophysical Union (AGU) will convene its 2005 Fall Meeting on Dec. 5-9, at the Moscone Center West (800 Howard St.) in San Francisco, CA. That’s in your neighborhood John. It might be worth blogging here at Dvorak Uncensored!

  2. Jim Dermitt says:

    Here’s the event link from my other post.
    5–9 December 2005, Monday–Friday
    Moscone Center West, 800 Howard Street
    San Francisco, CA, USA
    http://www.agu.org/meetings/fm05/

    The Fall Meeting is expected to draw a crowd of over 11,000 geophysicists from around the world.

  3. Eideard says:

    Jim — since early Altamont Pass facility started up — and developers realized siting caused bird collisions — it’s SOP pretty much around the world to study and sort migration patterns as part of preconditions for wind generation sites. Works well.

    NIMBY’s focus, nowadays, on “scenic distortion”.

  4. RTaylor says:

    The bigger picture here is the notion of a 15 year plan. The 2 and 4 year election cycle in the US makes long term Science investments very difficult. It’s worse today when newly elected officials start raising funds for the next campaign before they even take the oath of office.

  5. Jim Dermitt says:

    “Research by raptor experts for the California Energy Commission (CEC) indicates that each year, Altamont Pass wind turbines kill an estimated 881 to 1,300 birds of prey, including more than 75 golden eagles, several hundred red-tailed hawks, several hundred burrowing owls, and hundreds of additional raptors including American kestrels, great horned owls, ferruginous hawks, and barn owls. These kills of over 40 different bird species are in violation of federal and state wildlife protection laws such as the Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act, Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and several California Fish and Game Code provisions.”
    Source: http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/swcbd/programs/bdes/altamont/altamont.html

    I’m all for a clean and green environment, but this wind power idea seems sort of crazy. Killing the birds to power the digital economy.
    I guess China is going to follow our lead.

  6. Jim Dermitt says:

    A good graphic.
    http://www.geoexchange.org/images/Home%20GX%20wntr.jpg
    A big plus is that you don’t need to build a bunch of turbines.
    All of which seems to depend on state funding schemes, so we can get more expensive energy out of the wind. Watch your state tax dollars blow away. What do you do when it’s not windy? I was reading how there is a big shortage of funds for U.S. highways and bridges. New gas taxes? Why not just dump millions into turbines? Goldman Sachs is into this, in a big way. It’s like mining the state treasury or something. Let’s just kill all the eagles while we are creating new energy. What a joke.

  7. Pat says:

    The mid-west would be a good place for these farms. Because of the flat terrain, there is little to block the wind. Also, there isn’t much of a view if someone has a concern about that. The wind is free and usually blows steadily. They could even be placed along the edges of fields to minimize the loss in agricultural land. Because the windmills are relatively quiet, non-polluting, and profitable, they should fit in well in most rural settings.

    Every little bit that will help reduce our dependence upon hydro-carbon energy and green house gases can only be good. This has to be a no-brainer. Plus, the more that are built, the more efficient they will become, and, hopefully, cheaper too.

  8. Jim Dermitt says:

    As Pat writes, “The mid-west would be a good place for these farms.”
    I sort of have the feeling that growing corn and cattle on farms may be a better solution for people interested in say eating. Maybe GM can toss up some turbines and power the assembly lines with cheap wind energy. GM can build wind powered cars next. You drive 60 MPH and the car has a turbine on the roof which charges the thing up. Don’t close all the Exxon stations just yet.

  9. Jim Dermitt says:

    Oil prices were way up thanks to the traders and whizbangs of Wall Street. Remember when gas went way up? Then there was jet fuel. Why not just kill the airlines, with a little help from the boys on Wall Street. Now the salvation is wind power. The oil companies took a PR beating, but even they couldn’t of hatched a plot to inflate oil prices like the recent one. Now the states are throwing cash into these wind schemes.

    Hell, China is even ramping up a big wind program. Wall Street is getting it all tied together on a high level, as the the consumer is left blowing in the wind. The eagles aren’t the only birds to be killed. All the airline employee givebacks have been burned on jet fuel price spikes. The pensions are bustouts Goldman Sachs may just be a bit more advanced than Enron at this energy trading business. Pretty slick operation.

  10. Eideard says:

    I’m certain you’re aware of this, Jim. We had a really interesting hot dry rock geothermal research program up the hill from my neighborhood almost 10 years ago. Sadly, that particular test facility in Los Alamos is probably still padlocked.

  11. Karl says:

    Relax Jim, not all wind power kills birds. The bird choppers we have also put out very little power. The are also a very old design. The Germans are testing 5mw turbines that only spin at 40-60 rpm posing no risk and are very quiet. Their 3mw models are being erected in farm fields right noe making farmers energy suppliers. The crops are being grown around them and the livestock are completely comfortable grazing near them.

    It is true that it isn’t windy all the time, but if distributed all over the country, it will be blowing somewhere. 25% of our land mass can support wind power as cheap as hydro-electric. The only reason it isn’t succeeding is we put projects in the hand of committees to do all these studies and nothing gets done. No project will survive a committee. By the way that 25% is about 840,000 sq. mi.. Think of all the unemployed going back to work to invest in our future.

    http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=21962

  12. Eideard says:

    I agree with Karl — and don’t especially disagree with Jim, either. I make the point about wind more often than other technologies because — though I live in a state where solar power is a no-brainer, the fact is that we’re already found capable of being a net energy-exporting state for wind-generated electricity, as well.

    The worries about significant numbers of birds being endangered were dealt with decades ago; but, NIMBY’s keep bringing around what happened at Altamont — before anyone knew better. My buds in Scotland now — where folks figure on easily 20% of power generation coming from wind — need only deal with the scenery lobby. Which, sadly, has even more buck$. None of these alternatives need be a priority vs. the others. Just posed as sensible economic methodology.

    I knew one of the lads involved in the hot rock project up at Los Alamos. He was delighted to be allowed to focus on something more productive than building a better plutonium bomb. Now, we’re back to calling ’em coneheads, again.

  13. Hal Jordan says:

    I dont think that China’s business model will be similar to western alternative energy producers. The Chinese profit not by breaking the camel’s back (as western producers who are after annual revenues) but by investing for the long haul and creating profit through volume orders. It’s almost expected that in 20 years, alternative energy resources from China will be the dominant supplier for the world’s energy needs.

  14. blast flame says:

    Money better spent on that than upgrading “the great firewall of china.”

  15. Jim Dermitt says:

    Karl makes a good point about the unemployed going back to work.
    I guess that is what the states are looking at. We had a big professional sports funding scheme in our state. The state dumps hundreds of millions into various stadiums, they are called parks today, and the next thing you know there are all kinds of ‘beer here’ jobs and the peanut vending industry is going strong once again.

    The wind energy industry may be a shell game, but it does help produce jobs. Another plus is that it is sustainable, since there will always be wind. So this creates more jobs, for wind consultants and new organizations to hold meetings. The study industry is booming from this stuff. Up in New England, well here’s the headline, Agencies split on wind power project.
    “The project is being watched closely by wind developers and opponents because a half dozen more projects are in the planning stages.” More studies needed, I’ll bet. Plenty of consulting to be done.
    http://www.boston.com/news/local/vermont/articles/2005/11/26/agencies_split_on_wind_power_project/
    They are debating the bats of East Mountain — built when the site was home to a U.S. Air Force radar station. You would think that with radar, the bats could avoid collision problems.

    Here’s more coverage.
    Wind power vs. view
    Burlington Free Press
    http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050306/LIVING/51013039&theme=WIND
    DEVELOPER: http://www.easthavenwindfarm.com
    OPPONENTS: http://www.kingdomcommonsgroup.org

    I’m not sure of what to make of the wind power industry. On the one side you have people who want to make an honest buck and on the other side you have people who don’t want to have to look at and listen to wind turbines 24/7. It’s the ultimate not in my backyard situation. One thing is for sure. Once we start importing millions of cheap Chinese built wind turbines, these things will be all over the place like cell towers making whup whup whup noise upsetting the locals. Maybe the corporate plan is to turn the soon to be shuttered GM plants into wind turbine factories and use wind power to build more turbines, which in turn will create more electricity to build even more turbines to export to China. In my area the next big economic boom is based on developing slot machine parlors and the games of chance industry. These may be our biggest hope for the future, slot machines and wind energy are where it’s at. One could only hope that the slots industry purchases green power from the local wind farmers. Beer here, get your ice cold beer here. There’s money in the air and thus hope. Our state may building a vodka factory soon, after we study if the potato crop is healthy enough to support a distillery. Maybe they’ll figure out a way to make vodka with wind power or something. Perhaps the engineers will place wind turbines in the city atop of skyscrapers and the Windy City will be wind powered. It seems better than transforming a mountain full of trees into a heap of propellers, plus you are generating the power where it is being used.
    Maybe urban windmills are the solution. The airport is kind of windy, so maybe they can convert the airports into windfarms since the jets aren’t making much money, just a great deal of noise. The airlines could turn all those old prop planes into little windmills and power the airport foodcourt with them.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5809 access attempts in the last 7 days.