Hot stuff
Hot on the heels of yesterday long D&D post, here's one for the Greenies in the audience. I found so much information this morning (not all of it brand new) that I don't even know where to start.
I suppose first we'll start with the old news. Apparently, since 1988, the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) and the Department of Energy (DoE) have been working on a fuel cell bus initiative. Starting way back then, they developed (or funded) three phosphoric acid fuel cell systems, dropped them into three 30' buses and had em scootin around three big universities. The thinking is that since buses run in very controlled environments, they're the perfect testing ground for fuel cell technology, AND they're common sights in most cities, meaning the buses themselves become a tool for acclimating people to the idea of fuel cell technology.
In 1998, they finished up a 40' bus powered by a fuel cell engine from Ballard Power Systems (which I think is in Vancouver. Aside from being the leader in fuel cell technology, right now, powering buses in Canada, the US, and Japan, as well as being the ONLY company that the leader of China visited in his most recent visit to Canada, they also have a sweet deal with Daimler/Chrysler and Ford to provide carbon coated transmission parts that aid fuel efficiency. I consider Ballard (BLDP) to be a pretty solid company, but I digress.) The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority has a one year deal to run this bus on many of its routes. They may have done so already, but the report at the link above uses the present tense.
That's all great news, but I wonder why there's 5 busses on the road in 17 years. I'm sure there are technological reasons on the early end of things, but the Ballard cells have been proven over and over again. If the FTA and DoE think that fuel cells are the way to go in the area of mass transit, how bout some incentives? I'm sure a requirement for any transit systems getting federal money, say all buses be fuel cell buses by 2015, would get the ball rolling. Of course, it's likely there is no federal funding for state ran mass transit systems. In that case, make some. Offer up a couple mil for any state willing to switch to fuel cell technology in its mass transit systems in the next 5 years. Sure, a cool mil won't pay for the transition, but it sweetens the pot along with cleaner air, lower transportation cost, etc. I don't have a feel for local metro transit authority, but I bet money that if such an offer was made PUBLIC, the citizens of the Twin Cities would really pressure the MTA.
Regardless, the FTA is a member of California Fuel Cell Partnership, which has over 30 members, including auto makers, energy companies, and obviously government agencies. What's really cool about the CFCP is that in January of this year (the 26th) they opened their first hydrogen refueling station in Santa Ana, CA. The way it works is that there are 30 Toyota Prius cars that have been reconfigured to be hydrogen fueled internal combustion engines. Five cities in CA will have refueling stations, capable of fueling 10 vehicles per day (with expansion potential). Two of em will even be researching using landfill stock as a means of gaining fuel. The company that's organizing the whole thing has a five year contract with the organization.
That's all good news. What's not good news is that even despite all of this good news, the gov (even NASA apparently) still insists on hiding the extent of greenhouse gases damaging the environment. It's tough to say how much of that is corporate interest in Washington, but I doubt we see a change from it soon. It's sad, because there are ample examples abroad of nations making moves in the right direction. Canada is making an effort to switch to fuel cell buses. Iceland is running three in the capital and is moving to a full bore oil free society, switching all cars to fuel cell and garnering most of it's electricity from geothermal and hydroelectric power. Japan is working on switching to fuel cell buses and gas/electric cars, and Europe is heavily motivated to move to a biodiesel/electric model. Hell, even China is researching hydroelectric options, and it can only be assumed that their recent visit to Ballard means there is some consideration of fuel cell technology.
Even more annoying, though, is that the Department of Defense is looking at fuel cell action, not for vehicles (maybe), but as battery back up power in the field. Ballard has a unit (called the Airsomething) that is basically a portable fuel cell generator. So there's at least THREE agencies making a move toward alternate source. Good stuff, but why isn't any of this being made more public. Seriously, how much would the administration's approval jump if this was all on the national media? What I wanna know is, are they missing the ball on how much easier the public would accept these changes if they seemed to be promoting them seriously, OR is the national media just not reporting any of it in an effort to keep the admins approval rating low during the upcoming elections? Either way, fie on someone.
It's not all doom and gloom and massive energy consumption in the public sector, though. Even Wal-Mart is getting into the green action, deciding it wants ALL of it's energy to come from renewable energy sources, and with XSun now starting to produce it's PowerGlass, Building Integrated Photovoltaics are reaching a point that a building could soon be supplying it's own power (with glass and shingles now power your home, you could be making money by selling electricity your house is making from the sun BACK to the energy companies. Right now, they're legally required to pay YOU for any excess energy your home produces). Honeywell, BP, and even Exxon and the big fuel companies in Europe have made big moves to research renewable energies (although for BP, I think, and the other European energy companies, the EU basically said, "hey, spend some of your large oil income on renewables, or we'll take from you in a special tax and do it ourselves." Better PR this way.)
So, bottom line, things are in motion. A little too slow for my tastes, but rolling. I just wish some of this stuff was more obviously in the mind's eye of the consumers. It wouldn't take much for people to once again consider things like energy requirements and waste product in their purchasing decision. Stop buying so many convenient, throw away items (we stop making that shit, we've just saved literally a TON of energy, specially if it comes from ethanol made from the funny little grass Bush mentioned in the state of the union), buy more energy efficient appliances, shit like that. Then there's turning off the light when you leave the room, clicking down the volume one notch, leaving for work ten minutes sooner... There's as much room for energy savings on an individual basis as there is a need for the stuff that's going on in the corporate and governance side of things. But that's a soapbox, and there's no room for that in this "article." :)
I suppose first we'll start with the old news. Apparently, since 1988, the Federal Transit Authority (FTA) and the Department of Energy (DoE) have been working on a fuel cell bus initiative. Starting way back then, they developed (or funded) three phosphoric acid fuel cell systems, dropped them into three 30' buses and had em scootin around three big universities. The thinking is that since buses run in very controlled environments, they're the perfect testing ground for fuel cell technology, AND they're common sights in most cities, meaning the buses themselves become a tool for acclimating people to the idea of fuel cell technology.
In 1998, they finished up a 40' bus powered by a fuel cell engine from Ballard Power Systems (which I think is in Vancouver. Aside from being the leader in fuel cell technology, right now, powering buses in Canada, the US, and Japan, as well as being the ONLY company that the leader of China visited in his most recent visit to Canada, they also have a sweet deal with Daimler/Chrysler and Ford to provide carbon coated transmission parts that aid fuel efficiency. I consider Ballard (BLDP) to be a pretty solid company, but I digress.) The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority has a one year deal to run this bus on many of its routes. They may have done so already, but the report at the link above uses the present tense.
That's all great news, but I wonder why there's 5 busses on the road in 17 years. I'm sure there are technological reasons on the early end of things, but the Ballard cells have been proven over and over again. If the FTA and DoE think that fuel cells are the way to go in the area of mass transit, how bout some incentives? I'm sure a requirement for any transit systems getting federal money, say all buses be fuel cell buses by 2015, would get the ball rolling. Of course, it's likely there is no federal funding for state ran mass transit systems. In that case, make some. Offer up a couple mil for any state willing to switch to fuel cell technology in its mass transit systems in the next 5 years. Sure, a cool mil won't pay for the transition, but it sweetens the pot along with cleaner air, lower transportation cost, etc. I don't have a feel for local metro transit authority, but I bet money that if such an offer was made PUBLIC, the citizens of the Twin Cities would really pressure the MTA.
Regardless, the FTA is a member of California Fuel Cell Partnership, which has over 30 members, including auto makers, energy companies, and obviously government agencies. What's really cool about the CFCP is that in January of this year (the 26th) they opened their first hydrogen refueling station in Santa Ana, CA. The way it works is that there are 30 Toyota Prius cars that have been reconfigured to be hydrogen fueled internal combustion engines. Five cities in CA will have refueling stations, capable of fueling 10 vehicles per day (with expansion potential). Two of em will even be researching using landfill stock as a means of gaining fuel. The company that's organizing the whole thing has a five year contract with the organization.
That's all good news. What's not good news is that even despite all of this good news, the gov (even NASA apparently) still insists on hiding the extent of greenhouse gases damaging the environment. It's tough to say how much of that is corporate interest in Washington, but I doubt we see a change from it soon. It's sad, because there are ample examples abroad of nations making moves in the right direction. Canada is making an effort to switch to fuel cell buses. Iceland is running three in the capital and is moving to a full bore oil free society, switching all cars to fuel cell and garnering most of it's electricity from geothermal and hydroelectric power. Japan is working on switching to fuel cell buses and gas/electric cars, and Europe is heavily motivated to move to a biodiesel/electric model. Hell, even China is researching hydroelectric options, and it can only be assumed that their recent visit to Ballard means there is some consideration of fuel cell technology.
Even more annoying, though, is that the Department of Defense is looking at fuel cell action, not for vehicles (maybe), but as battery back up power in the field. Ballard has a unit (called the Airsomething) that is basically a portable fuel cell generator. So there's at least THREE agencies making a move toward alternate source. Good stuff, but why isn't any of this being made more public. Seriously, how much would the administration's approval jump if this was all on the national media? What I wanna know is, are they missing the ball on how much easier the public would accept these changes if they seemed to be promoting them seriously, OR is the national media just not reporting any of it in an effort to keep the admins approval rating low during the upcoming elections? Either way, fie on someone.
It's not all doom and gloom and massive energy consumption in the public sector, though. Even Wal-Mart is getting into the green action, deciding it wants ALL of it's energy to come from renewable energy sources, and with XSun now starting to produce it's PowerGlass, Building Integrated Photovoltaics are reaching a point that a building could soon be supplying it's own power (with glass and shingles now power your home, you could be making money by selling electricity your house is making from the sun BACK to the energy companies. Right now, they're legally required to pay YOU for any excess energy your home produces). Honeywell, BP, and even Exxon and the big fuel companies in Europe have made big moves to research renewable energies (although for BP, I think, and the other European energy companies, the EU basically said, "hey, spend some of your large oil income on renewables, or we'll take from you in a special tax and do it ourselves." Better PR this way.)
So, bottom line, things are in motion. A little too slow for my tastes, but rolling. I just wish some of this stuff was more obviously in the mind's eye of the consumers. It wouldn't take much for people to once again consider things like energy requirements and waste product in their purchasing decision. Stop buying so many convenient, throw away items (we stop making that shit, we've just saved literally a TON of energy, specially if it comes from ethanol made from the funny little grass Bush mentioned in the state of the union), buy more energy efficient appliances, shit like that. Then there's turning off the light when you leave the room, clicking down the volume one notch, leaving for work ten minutes sooner... There's as much room for energy savings on an individual basis as there is a need for the stuff that's going on in the corporate and governance side of things. But that's a soapbox, and there's no room for that in this "article." :)
posted by Amazing Shafeman at 9:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home