Tyler
(NOTE: This Blogware blog has been moved to Wordpress. Please reset your links to www.cleanbreak.ca. I will post entries on both sites for the next week to allow for smooth transition, but as of September 1 this Blogware site will not be updated. All new entries will only be found at www.cleanbreak.ca. Thank you.)
The Ottawa Centre for Research and Innovation (OCRI) is currently accepting applications for companies wishing to compete in its annual Canada's Top 10 Competition. The competition has been around since 1999, but was initially focused on life sciences companies. It has since expanded to include the Top 10 innovators in the cleantech and IT sectors.
An independent expert panel of U.S. and Canadian venture capitalists chooses the winners, which get to present their business cases on a U.S. three-city VC road show (Boston, New York and Silicon Valley) next January and February. Winners will be announced October 7 at the Ottawa Venture and Technology Summit.
Cleantech entry applications were originally due Aug. 29, but the deadline has been extended to Sept. 11. Last year's winners include solar companies Menova Engineering and Mondial Energy. Click here for this year's cleantech jury.
"This program is an excellent opportunity to help companies get in front of qualified investors from Canada and the U.S.," said an OCRI official. "Winning companies have access to financing opportunities, new markets, and potential strategic partners through investment forums and road shows, coaching clinics that refine their corporate pitches, and ongoing support for business development."
Tyler
(NOTE: This Blogware blog has been moved to Wordpress. Please reset your links to www.cleanbreak.ca. I will post entries on both sites for the next week to allow for smooth transition, but as of September 1 this Blogware site will not be updated. All new entries will only be found at www.cleanbreak.ca. Thank you.)
Last week we knew a big announcement would be made, but this morning the cat is out of the bag. Norway’s Renewable Energy Corp. said today it will build a solar silicon materials plant in Becancour, Quebec, and will invest at least $1.2 billion (Cdn) to do it. This is a huge announcement, and will create 300 jobs in the province. REC said it chose Quebec because it was able to negotiate a competitive 20-year electricity rate from the province. That, combined with the fact that a lion’s share of power production in Quebec is hydroelectric, sat well with REC. The company apparently was interested in lowering the carbon footprint of its energy-intensive business.
Good on Quebec for driving this deal through. According to REC, it spent 17 months screening more than 100 possible locations in 16 countries. It then narrowed the list to 40 sites before going through intense due diligence. Once a short list was established it engaged in final negotiations. Certain jurisdictions, like Iceland or Quebec, have an advantage over others because they are heavy on renewables — such as geothermal and hydroelectric — and aren’t subject to fuel price volatility. This means they can not only offer power for cheap, but can also offer a price that stays the same for 20 years.
Tyler
(NOTE: This Blogware blog has been moved to Wordpress. Please reset your links to www.cleanbreak.ca. I will post entries on both sites for the next week to allow for smooth transition, but as of September 1 this Blogware site will not be updated. All new entries will only be found at www.cleanbreak.ca. Thank you.)
My Clean Break column today takes a look at the shortcomings of wind power and the need for economical storage. On the latter point, the last half of my column discusses an Alberta-based company called Lancaster Wind Systems (no Web site yet, sorry), which is building a new kind of wind turbine that has all its components and complexity at the base of the turbine, not in the nacelle. At the same time, it is developing a system that “locally stores wind energy using a hydraulic accumulator in conventional high-pressure pipeline storage banks, enabling its use as on-demand peak power.”
Lancaster won’t go into much detail about this, preferring to wait until it has filed all its patents. But CEO Daniel Kenway says the plan is to take knowledge and expertise in the Alberta oil patch, as well as manufacturing capabilities, and apply them to wind-energy systems. Intriguing. He also says a first project, partly funded by Sustainable Development Technology Canada, will demonstrate a 1-megawatt turbine with a 2-megawatt-hour storage capability. After which the company plans to scale up by “orders of magnitude.” Kenway says two configurations are possible: storage paired to a single turbine, or a larger-scale storage system paired with clusters of turbines. The latter, obviously, would prove more economical because of economies of scale. But he says the single-turbine storage system could prove useful in remote communities that are dependent on diesel generators.
As Kenway told me in an interview (and this comment wasn’t in the column), “If you choose your components correctly, it turns out it’s possible to store as much as a few hours worth of energy at the side of the turbines. How we do that I would leave as a secret for a little while. But the notion is that in the end all of what we’re using are elements of technology already commonly found in Alberta. It’s not like we’ve discovered some new vanadium cell or some speculative thing. It’s a case of using good engineering principles and novel integration.” The only detail he gave is that the initial stage of the energy storage conversion process has to do with pressurization in a hydraulic circuit. Beyond that, we’re left guessing.
The result is dispatchable wind energy, and the goal is to achieve the same degree of reliability and efficiencies as found with coal or nuclear plants. Kenway says with economies of scale means the cost of the storage would be about 10 per cent of the cost of the turbines, and capital efficiency could reach about 85 per cent. “When you start looking at how much money you spend on the means of energy production, versus how much money you spend on storage, and how you allocate your capital ratios, that interplay (let’s you) effectively put most of the grid on renewable energy,” he says.
T. Boone Pickens may be interested in this one. Lancaster is working with the Wind Energy Institute of Canada and the University of Alberta on the SDTC project. One of the most interesting aspects of its planned storage system is the fact that it can be retrofitted to existing turbines or wind farms. In other words, if the company’s system works as planned at the costs forecasted, the tens of thousands of wind turbines already in operation around the world can be coupled with storage.
Tyler
Please be patient. Thank you.
Tyler
Why is Ontario the only place this happens?
You may recall back in April I wrote about an Internet company, founded by two Ontario entrepreneurs, that makes it easier for people to share a ride to events, like sports games or concerts. The service, called PickupPal, is kind of like an Internet dating service for drivers and riders. They go online, get matched up depending on where they're going and when they need to go, then the driver and rider are left to negotiate their own arrangement. PickupPal has about 100,000 registered members after only eight months in operation, attracting users from around the world -- mostly Canada, the U.S. and Australia. Ontario represents about 10 per cent of its members.
Good idea, right? Help people share a ride, get some cars of the road, reduce congestion and make the air easier to breath. Well, seems one of Canada's largest chartered bus companies doesn't agree. It has applied to Ontario's transport board and is asking to have PickupPal shut out of Ontario. Their argument, to be fair, isn't that unreasonable: they say there's nothing stopping a van shuttle service from using PickupPal to arrange vanloads of people travelling popular routes. These vans are not properly insured and don't meet the same strict safety standards as the bus companies. Oh, and they also cut into the bus company's business.
But really, there's got to be a compromise here. Under Ontario law, it's technically illegal for a person to offer a drive somewhere to a couple of buddies and charge for gas. This just doesn't make sense. Fortunately, the Ontario government, as a result of this story being publicized, says it is now reviewing the province's Public Vehicle Act and hopes to make amendments that make both sides happy.
Better move fast, for PickupPal's sake.
Tyler
Google.org's $10.25 million (U.S.) investments in AltaRock Energy Inc. and Potter Drilling Inc. brings much-needed attention to the potential of enhanced geothermal systems, and the goal of tapping geothermal heat resources almost anywhere on the plant. AltaRock is trying to perfect the process of fracturing rock, an ambitious engineering feat that would allow geothermal developers to create the necessary conditions for a geothermal power plant almost anywhere electricity is demanded. Potter is adapting drilling techiques from the oil and gas industry through the development of new drilling technology that uses high-pressure fluid to bore through hard rock.
If enhanced geothermal, or EGS, could be made economical the implications are enormous. We're talking baseload, emission-free electricity on a massive scale that, over time, could eliminate the need for coal-fired or nuclear power plants. It would also silence the critics of renewables who says wind and solar are inadequate because of their intermittancy. Sure, perhaps all this won't happen in a lifetime, but it bodes well for future generations who can look forward to ample supplies of solar, wind, and geothermal power and their support of electric vehicles.
Google, the world's most popular Internet brand, isn't breaking the bank with this investment. In fact, AltaRock announced yesterday that Google's investment, through its philanthropic arm Google.org, is only part of a $26.25 million financing round involving Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, Khosla Ventures and two other VCs. But what Google brings to this technology is much-needed public awareness. Google can make EGS look relevant and cool, as it has done for plug-in electrics and solar thermal. Google has reach. Google has clout. Google, in addition to making money, is also on a mission to drive change.
Drill for heat, not oil, is what Google is essentially saying with this investment.
So, how does Google's investment benefit Canada? Well, to my American friends, it probably comes as no surprise that my oil-sands-obsessed country is asleep at the switch on the geothermal front. We stopped collecting data on geothermal resources back in the 1980s, and currently have zero -- Z-E-R-O -- power production in the country from geothermal. It's not like there isn't potential in British Columbia and Alberta, which shares similar geography to geothermal-rich states in the U.S. west. And as AltaRock founder Susan Petty tells me, EGS could unlock potential in eastern provinces like Ontario, just as geothermal power plants could one day sprout up in New York or Michigan where a history of natural gas drilling has shown some high-temperature anomolies.
Google Earth has a geothermal mapping application that gives a sense of the potential in these northeastern states. Drill up to 9.5 kilometres in Michigan and 2 per cent recovery of geothermal resources will get you 7,721 megawatts. In New York the yield is 10,156 megawatts. That's at least a couple of big nuclear plants.
Again, it may take a couple of decades to make this depth of drilling economical, but bring it on.
Google Earth, as expected, doesn't show the potential in Canada. That's because we don't have the data. And herein lies the Canadian angle to Google.org's announcement: The search giant has given Southern Methodist University Geothermal Lab about $500,000 "to improve understanding of the size and distribution of geothermal energy resources and to update geothermal mapping of North America."
The italics are my emphasis. I confirmed with the folks at Google.org that indeed the university will be mapping all of North America, including Canada. This effort is something that should be funded and overseen by the Canadian government, but since that's not likely to happen anytime soon (we don't even have our own monthly inventory of oil, natural gas and gasoline production/stockpiles), it's good to see somebody else filling the vacuum. So thank you Google. When the data does become available, it will be much easier to sell the idea of geothermal development in Canada to both the public and our politicians.
It's so silly, really, that a U.S. company is paying a U.S. university to do the work that should be funded and conducted by Canadians. Is there not any agency in Canada, any university, willing to fund and take on this analysis at home? Can we not find $500,000 (far less is probably required) to conduct an analysis of our own back yard?
I issue the challenge.
Tyler
Following a study that was recently released from the University of Texas at Austin, which said livestock manure could be used to satisfy up to 3 per cent of U.S. electricity demand, I decided to zero in on the potential for Canada, and specifically Ontario. I learned that the potential was even higher in Ontario, but also learned -- sadly -- that the province produces less than half a megawatt from livestock manure using gas from anaerobic digester systems. This, despite the existence of a program that for the past two years has offered a premium of 11 cents per kilowatt-hour for biogas-based power production. Apparently it's not enough.
I've got a feature on this issue in today's Toronto Star if you'd like to explore more fully.
Compare that to Germany, where more than 3,700 anaerobic digester systems produce about 800 megawatts, and the situation in Ontario stinks, to say the least. Some say by 2015 Germany will have 20,000 digesters producing 4,000 megawatts. So what's the holdup in Ontario? Red tape. Insufficient incentives. Lack of awareness or appreciation of the benefits of digester technology, which not only creates renewable power but also kills pathogens in manure that can foul up water systems. It also replaces methane emissions with carbon emissions -- a 21-to1 reduction in the carbon-trading world.
Now, the rules will be under review later this year, but the Ontario Power Authority is making no guarantee that incentives will increase. That said, there's a general sense that the red tape needs to come down. Whether Ontario -- or Canada, or the United States for that matter -- can realize the full potential of animal poop in power production, we'll likely have to wait a few years to see.
Tyler
I've got a story in this morning's Toronto Star about low-temperature geothermal -- a.k.a "earth energy systems" or "ground-source heat pumps" or "geoexchange systems" -- and rapid sales of the systems in Canada, particularly Ontario. I'll gloss over the details here, but essentially sales growth of the systems in Canada is in the range of 45 to 55 per cent and far outpaces growth in the United States. Ontario over the past 15 months has outpaced the next closest province, Quebec, by a margin of more than 4 to 1 in terms of residential retrofits. The growth has been so fast that the association representing the industry, the Canadian GeoExchange Coalition, is warning consumers about fly-by-night contractors who aren't qualified to install the systems but want to ride on the wave of demand.
Perhaps the most interesting comments came from Bruce Ritchey, president and CEO of Indiana-based Waterfurnace Renewable Energy Inc., one of the top sellers of geothermal systems in North America. While overall revenue growth in the company's last quarter is in the range of 20 per cent, sales to Canada were up about 120 per cent compared to the previous year. In Ontario growth was 200 per cent. Ritchey said sales to Canada have been "phenomenal," and attributes it to strong government incentives, increased awareness of the technology, and an economy that has been impacted less by the U.S. housing crisis. Of course, rising fuel and electricity prices is also driving sales across the board in all jurisdictions.
Tyler
Excuse me for a moment while I trump my own horn. Just wanted to point out that Canadian Business magazine has included this blog in its list of "Top 10" best Web sites for ethical investors. According to the article, by columnist Larry MacDonald, Clean Break is "the exhaustive blog of Toronto Star energy columnist Tyler Hamilton on 'trends, happenings, and innovation in the clean technology market' and it comes with plenty of links to clean technology companies, sources and blogs."
It's an honour...
Tyler
A Texas company, Synfuels International, has come up with a way to turn natural gas into gasoline and other liquid fuels that is much cheaper and cleaner than established processes, namely the Fischer-Tropsch approached used since Nazi Germany converted coal and coal-bed methane into diesel fuel back during the Second World War.
Now why would anyone convert natural gas into gasoline? It's not that all natural gas would undergo this process. The target is natural gas that results as a byproduct of oil extraction in remote locations. Oil companies, more focused on getting at the oil, usually flare or vent natural gas that comes to the surface because it's too expensive to build a dedicated pipeline that would collect it and send it to market. A lot of this gas is wasted this way. The World Bank estimates about 150 billion cubic meters every year is flared -- the combined total gas consumption of France and Germany. The associated greenhouse gas emissions are enormous.
Some, such as BP and Shell, have counted on Fischer-Tropsch plants as a less expensive alternative to building a dedicated natural gas pipeline. The plants would convert the natural gas into gasoline, diesel or jet fuel and transport it by truck/ship, or send it to market inside existing oil pipelines. Unfortunately the cost of Fischer-Tropsch still remains too high. Synfuels hope to change the game, offering plants that have a third the footprint of a Fischer-Tropsch plant but with the same output. "Why use a sledgehammer when you only need a hammer?" said Synfuels president Tom Rolfe. Scientists behind the company figure they can produce, on small scale, a barrel of gasoline from natural gas for about $25, compared to $35 for a Fischer-Tropsch plant benefiting from economies of scale. They also say their plant is cleaner, producing none of the hard waxes, toxic byproducts and other "crud" associated with Fischer-Tropsch.
For a full story on the Synfuels technology check out this article in MIT Technology Review. I don't typically write about better ways to use fossil fuels, but in this case if we can put more natural gas to use rather than flare/vent it, and at the same time displace the use of oil, then it's something that should be pursued.
