Random Thoughts of Chris Tilley

Google has a really neat new feature where you can go down to the street level of given city. You are literally on the street as if you are walking down it and the resolution is great. They have a YouTube video introduction.

So far they have San Francisco, Denver, Las Vegas , New York and Miami. I am sure that they will be adding more.

Next I'm sure we will be able to 'walk' into virtual shops and purchase goods soon. Probably using the the Google SketchUp. Real world Second Life anyone.

This will evolve quickly and companies are going to need to get on the bandwagon fast.

One of the links to my post from the other day lead me to this YouTube video on a proposed IGCC Coal Plant in Taylorville, IL. Illinois coal has a problem with sulfur content which makes it less marketable due to environmental regulations. An IGCC Coal plant can remove most of that sulfur and make that coal marketable again. The 'Clean Coal Plant in Would Be Economic Boon, NIU Study Finds' article from BusinessWire list a number of benefits to the economy.

They are getting incentives from the state government who is trying to revitalize the coal mining industry but this is a large plant that must be economically feasible or they wouldn't build it. So there are some new plants in the pipeline to be built. I still think that a carbon cap and trade system would speed up the process.

There's an article form yesterday 'US and Berlin clash on G8 climate text'. The clash revolves around caps and the US insistence that they are not necessary.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, would like the summit to agree limits on carbon emissions but the US says climate change should be tackled with technology-based solutions rather than mandatory emissions targets and accuses Berlin of ignoring its stance.

I agree fully that technology is the answer. However there needs to be some motivation to go forward and that is where a Cap and Trade program comes in. Necessity is the mother of invention. Right now very few see reducing carbon as a necessity. When carbon effects their bottom line then it becomes a necessity.

A good example is GE's Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) system. The benefits of such a system are great.

Over a 25-year lifespan a GE IGCC plant being designed today for 600 megawatts is expected to provide significant emission reductions when compared to recently permitted pulverized coal technology, including:
» more than two million tons of carbon dioxide.
» more than 67,000 tons of sulfur dioxide.
» nearly 26,000 tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxide.

The first one of these went online in 1984 and now there are two in the US. Why? Well to some extent reliability is an issue but there are variations out there that have a 90-95 uptime. There is a 25% price premium on current plants, GE's new plants are expect to come in at 10%. Why should I build a more expensive plant when carbon doesn't cost me anything. Now that sounds like raising the price of electricity and it probably will have a minor effect. However coal is still some of the cheapest power around. Eliminating coal is not going to be an option.

A Cap and Trade program would provide incentives to build more efficient plants. That would pump money back into R&D. That would reduce the capital and or operating costs. Develop the technology and then export it. Our strongest competitive advantage is innovation. Too bad a lot of executives only see the bottom line for this year and how much their bonus is going to be rather than the long term growth of the company.

I have been following the movement to bring high speed trains to California for a number of years. They are getting closer to actual construction with construction bonds going to public vote Nov 4 2008. They are looking to get $9.95 billion for the construction of the link from San Francisco to Anaheim.

That seems like a lot of money but 'HSR will cost only half as much to build than the same capacity in roads and air alone, and will require less land, affect fewer natural resources, and will encourage more compact urban development.' It will eliminate the need for 2970 Lane miles of highways, 91 airport gates and 5 new runways.

They have a nice pdf on the effects on global warming. Some of the key points:

• Eliminate the equivalent of 11 Billion miles of vehicle travel.
• Uses 1/3 the energy of an airplane.
• Uses 1/2 the energy of a car driving intercity.
• Uses 1/5 the energy of a commuter car.
• 34% less energy to construct than the equivalent airport and highway improvements.

They have a 10-minute overview of the California High-Speed Rail project. (YouTube) It is well presented and answers a lot of question. Definitely worth watching and forwarding on to all your friends.

It going to go 200mph, faster than most other option and probably even faster than plane when you count in clearing security. It is cheaper than the equivalent capacity of roads and airport expansions. It will be far better for the environment and global warming. It should be an easy choice for Californians but it probably won't be.

The US is considering a bill that would mandate an average 35 MPG fuel economy across an automakers line up. On the surface this looks good but the problems are in the details and it doesn't go far enough, fast enough.

First how do they calculate the average. If it is the average of all vehicles sold then great. If it is an average across each model with no consideration for numbers sold then bad.

Second what are the loopholes? Can they earn credits for anything? They are removing the bonuses for flex fuel. I'm not sure thats a good idea but on the other hand its misleading to claim an average MPG of X when its really lower.

The reaction from the automakers is priceless. "It's unattainable up to 2020, and unattainable thereafter," said Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers spokeswoman Gloria Bergquist. Quote from FreeP.com. Bull, The Chinese already have tougher standards in place. They went in to effect in 2005, 38 MPG for light vehicles and 19 for trucks. Those increase to 43 and 21 in 2008. Here is a blog entry from 2005 on Chinese Fuel Efficiency Standards. And we are saying that it can't be done by 2020 or ever. What are these car companies going to do when gas is $5 a gallon and we can't afford to run their gas guzzlers?

These guy need to learn to compete on fuel economy and this is something they can do. Honda and Toyota already compete heavily on this and the Chinese cars are coming.

We do have some hope, this is possible and there are groups working to that goal. See my related post to see some groups that can help us reach this goal and beyond.

My Related Posts

Automotive X Prize Draft Rules
StarRotor
Automotive X PRIZE
Plug In Electric Hybrids

Want to go solar but don't like the look of panels or have a restrictive home owners association? These solar shingles blend in nicely. Here are some pictures.

The company that makes these is United Solar Ovonic. This is the kind of innovation that will save us money, Make the company money and reduce CO2 emissions.

When I first saw them they looked expensive for the power so I decided to crunch the numbers. I used the price on the above website and the rated peak watts. The shingles worked out to $9.70/watt, my randomly selected panel worked out to $8.22/watt. To me the aesthetics and that I wouldn't be buying regular shingle makes the price difference meaningless.

The other stat that I worked out was the watts per square foot. For the shingles it is 5 2/3 watts/sq foot and for the panel it was 12.28 watts/sq foot. I would expect this to improve as they develop the technology further.

Its going to be a number of years before I need a new roof but I will definitely be looking at these when the time comes.

I have been away for a couple of weeks and had to use a computer that only had IE7 installed and was locked down so I couldn't install Firefox. I have used Firefox for years and found it very annoying to be using IE again. I was going to write a comparison of the two but in researching I came across this site Frankenfight: IE7 Vs. Firefox 2. They cover all the points I wanted to plus some I hadn't thought about. I did have one point that really annoyed me about IE.

That one point is the lack of spell checking in fields. In writing this blog, saying I rely on spell checking is a major understatement. I ended up moving the blog over to Word (I use Open Office at home) and spell checking it there and then having to move in back. IE will add spelling eventually just like they did for tabs.

The final thing comes from my wife who develops web pages. Her statement that she develops for Firefox and then fixes for IE. Switch to Firefox now, you will never go back.

Today I discovered Gelato. I spent the last two weeks in Vancouver and decided to experiment in where I ate. I found a number of wonderful places and I like the idea of local and unique. The more I think about the more I like the idea. All the food was fresh and therefore was probably local at least more local that some of the alternatives. That would make this style of eating more environmentally friendly. There was also much less packaging even on the stuff I got to go.

Anyways the Gelato, I had never had any before and was never sure exactly what it was. I found a good website the explains the difference between Ice Cream vs Gelato. I had the chocolate and my son had the sour cherry. It was a small bowl with a tiny 'tasting' spoon but it was so loaded with flavorful that I felt I had eaten far more than I really had. Quality versus quantity. The Gelato was made in store with all natural high quality ingredients and that definitely made the difference. It was clean, crisp, flavorful and I will be returning for more next time I'm in Vancouver. The place is called BC Gelato and is at the corner of W Broadway and Spruce.