Global cooling?

This winter has been extraordinarily harsh – most of the northern hemisphere has experienced below-average temperatures since as far back as Christmas 2009. And after more than three weeks of this, it seems that it is here to stay for some time still. Weather forecasters blame a rare (one- in-60- years-event) for this; there is supposed to be a high pressure area around the north pole itself, which is sending cool air to all areas south of it. And since Europe, North America and Asia are already covered with snow, the air just breezes through unchanged – causing southern areas to receive very cold weather.

People will say that it is rather early to make conclusions about the global climate at this point; after all, aren’t there record high temperatures in Australia? But, I’ll make the point anyway: perhaps this is the onset of a “global cooling” trend, one that neutralizes or even overcomes “global warming”.

Why? The possible answer may lie in the sun itself, which we know to be the source of most of the heat in our planet today. If somehow, the heat coming from the sun is lesser than it used to be; then, this will result in cooler weather. Well, then, the heat coming from the sun IS less than normal; but the thing is, scientists say that this is only 0.1% less than normal. This is because of the solar sunspot cycle, which usually lasts 11 years – the difference between the solar radiation during the minimum and the maximum should be only 0.1%.

Cycle No. 23 ended in mid-2008, meaning that sunspots go down to zero (or almost zero) at this time, and then should have started to increase towards a new maximum. But up to now, almost two years later, the sunspots have not really appeared in numbers again, so far sunspot activity has been really anemic. Thus, Cycle No. 24 has NOT started, and we are in an extended minimum sunspot period.

So, what about it?  Well, the thing is that the last time the sun had an extended period without sunspots was  during the Maunder minimum (1645-1715),  when the world had a “Little Ice Age” with extremely cold winters (the Thames and even the Rhine froze during winter). Scientists aren’t exactly sure why this happened, so we are still in the dark about this. However, this means that the drop in solar energy is more than the usual difference of 0.1% between the sunspot minimum and sunspot maximum.  And this is the point where we may be at. What if the sun continues not to show its spots? then, we may be seeing a start of another Little Ice Age.
All this talk about an extended sunspot minimum is still quite speculative. Who knows, maybe the sun is about to come out of its slumber and start showing its spots? But what if the sun continues with its minimum sunspot activity? Then we will be in for a shorter or longer period of cold weather.

What about global warming?
I still believe that human activity is to blame for an increased greenhouse effect, and that a growing portion of the heat from the sun is kept inside the atmosphere as the CO2 concentration grows. However, if the sun is sending out less warmth, there will be less heat to dissipate or retain.
Thus, even though the world’s climate may get cooling influences from the reduction of solar radiation for a time; the warming trend is set to continue once the sun resumes with its usual amount of radiation when the sunspot cycle resumes. Which is to say that what we may be having is a temporary respite from global warming  and not a total cooling trend. And instead of shelving our plans for alternative energy sources and adaptation, we should make the most use of this “extra time” that we have been given to catch up with our anti-global warming measures for the time when the sunspots return.

Solar’s future is not blue

Solar energy is approaching “grid parity”, which is the point where the cost of solar energy will be equal or less than the cost of electricity from the grid.  We could expect it to happen, at least for the sunnier areas, in about 3 to 5 years. But this does not mean that, all of a sudden, every house will have blue solar panels on their roofs.  It will most probably happen quite “invisibly”, in that it won’t be that obvious. What will solar electricity post “grid parity” look like?

Deserts first
The first places which will generate solar electricity will naturally be in open spaces with lots of sun. Deserts are ideal, since it has lots of sun, and is usually not used for much else.  Grid parity will arrive first for these areas, since it would produce much more electricity (and thus making it relative cheap) than in urban areas, for example.

While many areas that use electricity may be far away from deserts, there are enough places where the desert is near population centers.  In Egypt, for example, the desert is literally next to the cities. This is also the case in more places in the middle east.  Some countries are already starting to set up solar facilities: the UAE’s Masdar city project is one example (it is a city designed to run on solar and wind energy).

While Arabian countries export oil, which (theoretically) competes with solar energy; they are also conscious that the oil will not last forever – they will go solar to prepare for the post-oil future. Also, it is also a big waste of the desert if they don’t do this.

Industrial and Commercial Roofs Next
The cost for solar energy go down as the area covered gets bigger. Thus, bigger buildings will be cost-effective for solar energy earlier than for houses.  In the US, the price of electricity from the grid averages 9 cents per KwH, and solar PV averages about 21 cents/KwH for commercial and industrial roofs.  With the coming of the new generation of PV Laminates,which are less efficient than the present “blue” panels but much cheaper, the price of solar electricity will be about 10cents/KwH.  With constant improvement of technology, and lowering of costs,   the price of solar electricity will be equal or even less than grid electricity in a couple of years, for bigger buildings.
For houses, however, it will probably be 5 years or more before grid parity will be achieved, even using PV laminates. (Another thing about PV laminates, is that it will be marketed mainly to the large-scale market, at least in the first few years)

Not “blue”
Solar energy technological developments make it more likely that the face of solar energy will not be the familiar blue solar panels. As mentioned above, PV laminates will be used more often for buildings (these would be either brown or gray). Then there are other technologies that would likely be used for generating electricity in open spaces. Concentrating solar towers use a whole field of mirrors to concentrate sunlight which is used to heat a liquid which runs a turbine. The project in Sevilla, Spain uses this technology.
Another technique is the solar-thermal tower.  With this, a big area is covered with a transparent plastic, and there is a horizontal tube in the middle. The sun heats the ground under the plastic, causing the air to rise out the tower. The rising air, as well as the air rushing to replace it, could then be used to run fans which generate electricity. This technique is less efficient in terms of electricity per area of ground used. However, it is relatively cheap to build; and if the ground price is cheap, the area that will be used will not be an issue.

Building materials
Various techniques are also being developed to integrate solar cells with building materials. The PV laminates could be made integral in the roofing material. Thus, the PV capacity comes together with the roof; rather than the present practice of placing the “blue” solar panels on the roof. This would make the whole operation cheaper.

Then there are various “printed PV” technologies which could integrate PV capacity on glass and walls of buildings.

All in all, PV grid parity will mean that solar electricity will be generated in relatively “invisible” ways or out-of-the-way places. In comparison, the present system of blue panels on roofs will look like hobbyist’s projects.

See also: Solar energy links

Shift oil use to electricity

We are now facing two aspects of the energy crisis: first is the obvious one of crude oil, while the other one is in electricity production. Since crude oil is in short supply, it is but logical to shift our gasoline and diesel use to electricity as much as possible. Since the overall electricity grid incorporates wind, hydro and even solar (although the majority is still generated through coal), electricity is easier to make “greener” than diesel.

There are a number of ways to shift from oil products to electricity.

Plug-in Electric Cars
The announcement by a number of car companies that they will come out with Plug-in Electric Cars is a welcome development. Not only will the cost per kilometer be less than for gasoline-driven cars, it will do wonders for air quality (at least, locally).

Electrifying the entire train system
One immediate advantage will be the savings in diesel from long-distance trucks that haul goods all over the US. Part of the electricity needed for running the system could be generated locally, using wind or solar energy. Another advantage of an electrified train system is that, when it is combined with high-speed train routes, would be a viable alternative to the airplane.

The US government should encourage these measures, even to the point of investing in some projects. These measures would generate a lot of employment (think of all the civil works to install electricity power lines for the trains, or for the construction of new locomotives, etc.). It would ease the demand for gasoline and diesel, and create conditions that would better fit with the introduction of more electricity from alternative sources.

Solar Energy Links

The Philippines is almost ripe for solar energy

In the Philippines today, solar energy – through photovoltaic (PV) cells – which transform the sun’s rays directly into electricity – is generally a niche product. It is seen mainly as a way of generating electricity for isolated communities e.g. small islands, etc. since these places would cost too much to get physically connected to the electricity grid (through transmission towers or underwater cables). Electricity from PV cells are viewed as too expensive when compared to electricity from the grid.

Electricity from PV cells is almost ripe for widespread installation in Philippine cities.
Some policy and infrastructure need to be put in place, but the underlying technology and economics of solar energy promise to make it ripe for widespread use very soon. Here are some factors:

Lots of sunlight. In contrast to European countries, the Philippines is endowed with a lot of sunlight all year round. And the sun’s rays are more intense, and the sun is nearly overhead at its highest point. This means that the amount of electricity that a PV cell can generate is potentially greater, and that the solar panel does not have to be “aimed” at a certain direction to get enough sunlight (it can simply lay flat on a roof).

Technological advances. Photovoltaic cells have become cheaper than before due to the substitution of expensive materials used (e.g. gallium and indium) with cheaper silicon, carbon and boron; thinner PV cells and easier installation and operation; advances in the efficiency of batteries, etc. Announcements of breakthroughs in the latest “thin film” technology have been made in January, which potentially could reduce the cost of PV cells by half, are a sign of big (and recent) strides in technology.

Rising Cost of Oil, Appreciating Peso. With the present state of PV development and the abundant sunlight in the Philippines, the cost of electricity from PV cells should now be around 12 pesos/KwH. If we compare this to the cost of producing electricity from oil (around 6 pesos/KwH) or coal (less than 4 pesos/kwH), then solar energy from PV cells is still more expensive. In the last two years, the cost of oil has doubled, and the peso has appreciated almost 20% in relation to the dollar. When the cost of oil rises, this would mean an increase in the cost of electricity generated by oil-fired generators. As the peso appreciates, the price of the imported components needed for solar energy generation goes down. If this trend of rising oil prices and appreciating peso is set to continue, the cost difference between solar energy and oil/coal will lessen.

Ripening?
Solar energy may not yet be ripe for widespread use just yet, but the economic and technological changes make it applicable for more and more places in the country. Where before, it may have been cost-effective for very small islands or really remote communities, the changes may mean that it could be cost-effective for less-remote communities. Some islands which are not connected to the national grid may be more dependent on fuel oil generators, which would mean that their retail cost of electricity would be significantly above the national average of 7 pesos/kwH. (assuming full dependence on fuel oil generators, retail prices would be above 9 pesos/KwH]) [in the national grid, about 30% of the electricity is produced from cheap renewable sources like geothermal, wind and hydroelectric]. In these places, solar power achieve grid-parity (which is when the cost of solar power is equivalent to the cost of electricity from the grid) would come earlier than in the main electricity grid.

While electricity from PV cells is still a bit more expensive than that from fuel-oil generators, there are some advantages of using PV cells even now. This would include:
Lesser transmission costs and risk. Solar energy is produced nearer the consumer, which means less cost for transmitting the electricity, and less risk of having power cuts because of problems in the transmission. After all, terrorists, rebels or extortionists could always blow up power lines; or an earthquake or other disaster could happen.

Possibility of having more sunlight, solar cells lasting longer. All the computations re the cost of solar energy are based on the expected amount of sunlight during a 20-year period. If there happen to be lesser cloudy days than the average, the electricity produced by the PV cells would be more, meaning that the cost per KwH would be less. Also, after the 20-year period, the solar cell will most probably still work; any electricity produced after this point is also cheaper.

Funds for projects that reduce CO2 emissions. Under international agreements meant to reduce greenhouse gases, funds are available for projects (especially in the third world) which reduce greenhouse gases. This is only available in cases where they are not (yet) commercially viable. Solar energy projects in the Philippines would qualify for these grants. These payments could easily bridge the gap between the cost of solar power and conventional electricity.

For more on solar energy: Solar Energy Links , Solar Energy in the Philippines