Public Power - November 2008 - (Page 14)

10 Questions 8 wind-generated electricity for the electricity now produced with natural gas. What is your view of this plan? I admire his aggressive investment in wind power and think he’ll do well with it. There are some specific ways we can use wind power to free up natural gas that are extremely lucrative, more so than selling wind kilowatthours. I don’t know if that’s part of his plan. What is described in his Web site is wholesale displacement of natural gas generation with wind. In our study, Winning the Oil Game, we showed that half of U.S. natural gas use can be saved at under $1 per mcf and two-thirds of that can be achieved at negative cost by saving natural gas-fired electricity. We focused on peaking, largely simplecycle. It will save 2 percent of natural gas use. Demand response and efficiency techniques are well proven. I’m astonished that this continues to be absent from our national energy conservation. If we wanted to replace natural gas, we would do it with demand response and efficiency before wind. We would use wind power mainly to displace coal, and take the carbon credits that would soon be available. In summary, Pickens is on the right track, making a lot of wind power. We may have different ideas on how best to save oil and use wind energy for best profit. The United States, led by Texas, added more wind capacity last year than coal capacity in the last five years combined. Also in July, Al Gore issued a challenge that the U.S. produce 100 percent of its electricity from renewable energy and truly clean carbon-free sources within 10 years. He said this goal is achievable, affordable and transformative. Do you agree? Why or why not? The timing is extremely aggressive. It could be done under wartime urgency conditions. I would like to know more about what he proposes and how. He is definitely on the right track. We’re designing the shape of an all-renew14 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2008 9 able grid. Many people haven’t noticed the micropower revolution going on in the global marketplace. Micropower provides one-third of the world’s new electricity and one-sixth of total electricity. It is not a fringe activity, it’s rapidly taking over the market, and it’s cheaper and has a lower financial risk than central thermal plants. [Would Gore’s proposal be] affordable? A judicious mixture of efficiency, demand response, cogeneration and distributed renewables is cheaper up front and in terms of life cycle cost than our current strategy. The only question in my mind about Gore’s proposal is how he would do the 10-year part. I think he’s including existing hydro and nuclear capacity, which would be counted as part of the 100 percent, so renewables would only have to replace 70 percent. Setting such a bold goal is helping to focus people on the size of the opportunity. The rate at which PV is taking off suggests it could meet all U.S. electric needs by 2050, but other renewables would grab much of the market. I was talking recently to the head of a large utility who realized that by 2050 every plant [the utility operates] would be retired. He has a clean slate, he can design every day the next step in the power system he wants for 2050. No regrets, no sunk costs. What is your most revolutionary or radical idea for reducing U.S. electricity consumption? How could it be implemented? Probably it’s the concept and practice of integrated design to make big changes cheaper than small ones. It’s pretty radical for economists weaned on the notion of diminishing returns. It’s bizarre to suppose super efficient buildings cost less to construct than less efficient ones. as well as municipal utilities—take to increase their energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions? Most of all, pay attention. It is a lot cheaper and easier to save electricity than to produce and deliver it. The opportunities for saving it keep getting bigger and cheaper, at an accelerating rate. Second, make sure the way you form prices and run accounts makes you better off financially by doing the cheapest thing first for the customer, not for selling more energy. Third, make sure that the way you make investment choices lets you compete fairly at honest prices, no matter what kind you are, what technology you use, or where you are located, how big you or who owns you. Finally, help mobilize the community and diverse constituencies to make energy efficiency a top priority that can also be key to many other economic, environmental and social needs. ❚ 10 Finally, what steps can the nation’s public utilities—joint action agencies PUBLIC POWER http://www.phase-a-matic.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Public Power - November 2008

Public Power - November 2008 Contents Perspective 10 Questions Capturing Knowledge Before It Retires Jackson’s GIS Search Keeping a Job Journal Japan Tackles the Kyoto Protocol Getting to 20 by 10 Damless Hydro Power Earthquake: The Hidden Disaster For Engineers Safety For Governing Boards DEED Hometown Connections Parting Shot

Public Power - November 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.