Take many small steps quickly... Copenhagen or bust

Today, I discovered a blog on the BBC written by Justin Rowlatt: the Ethical Man blog. Mr. Rowlatt and his family tried to reduce their carbon usage for a year for a television program.

One issue covered in Mr. Rowlatt's post is potential opposition against wind farms in Britain, supported by arguments by Dr. David MacKay. Dr. MacKay estimates the power produced by a wind farm per unit area for an average 6-m/s wind as 2.2 W/m^2 (of land area). The wind potential calculated for those winds is 140 W/m^2 (of swept area). (I kind of wish he integrated the instantaneous power to calculate the energy produced instead, making use the histograms shown here, though. It would have been more accurate.)

Dr. MacKay believes that wind power is insufficient to supply enough energy to cover enough of Britain's total energy usage (not just electricity, but also heating and transportation) to be worthwhile, especially considering Britain's small area and relatively large population. He is known to advocate a massive move toward nuclear power in order to significantly reduce carbon emissions now (while figuring out how to deal with radioactive waste and more environmentally-friendly solutions later). It is not an outright horrific idea anymore (which in itself is depressing), considering that potential catastrophic climate change is likely to occur before the 22nd century rolls around. At the same time, wind power helps. A lot of steps need to be taken together to make a real difference. (Plus nuclear waste is a major negative... and it's not like we have infinite uranium reserves either...)

One thing I should note is that Mr. Rowlatt says that wind power is a "very dilute energy source". True, but one must note that the only reason fossil fuels seem like a concentrated energy source is due to hundreds of millions of years of geologic processes. As Dr. David Suzuki once said, fossil fuels are a one-time gift from the planet, and we're burning it all up (and it's not taking us a hundred million years to do so).

As for Canada, we're in the opposite position of Britain. We have a relatively small population and a huge country. Furthermore, we have some awesome wind potential (based on swept area) in Canada as shown on this wind map. At 80 metres high, Canada has plenty of regions that easily surpass 1000 W/m^2 of wind potential based on swept area (most notably around the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador). Even in the heart of coal-addicted Alberta, there is some decent wind potential (most notably in the Rockies, and a region near Edmonton). Yes, Canada has huge areas having more than seven times the wind potential in Britain.

Even if some locations are off-limits due to ecological concerns, there is still a huge area that can be considered. (Did I mention that Canada is huge?)

The Conservative government has sent representatives to Copenhagen with Canada now viewed as one of the "bad guys" with regards to climate change. The Conservatives (and Ignatieff) regard, at least outwardly, the tar sands as a crucial part of Canada's future and economy. Despite what the tar sands generate, the future does not lie in fossil fuels, and tying Canada to an anchor that's going to be tossed off the side of the boat eventually is silly. Heck, Alberta produces most of its electricity by burning coal (so yeah, electric cars might be worse for the environment in Alberta). The worst part is that inaction will not affect the worst polluters first. It is the people who live on small islands, like the Maldives, who will suddenly find their land disappearing rapidly as ocean levels keep rising.

Instead of thinking about how Canada is blessed with the money-making tar sands, remember that Canada is blessed with so many more resources, as the previously-linked wind map shows. Take advantage of the economic depression, and spend some government money on starting up some green industries, or start some government projects like setting up wind farms (or concentrated solar collectors or whatever). This will rebuild and diversify our economy, reduce our reliance on oil, and reduce our carbon emissions. Many small steps can taken quickly.

The rest of the world is probably looking at Canada and wondering why we seem unwilling to step up when it is quite possibly the easiest for us to step up. Britain wishes it had Canada's size and wind resources for their wind farms.

Peace and long life.

Concentrating solar power (CSP) for home

Historically, electrical power generation on a large scale has relied on getting a turbine to rotate, which in turn rotates a connected armature (wire windings) within an unchanging magnetic field (typically permanent magnets). (In motor terms, the armature would be the rotor, and the magnetic field would be provided by the stator.) Getting the turbine to rotate often involved (in fact, still involve) the burning of fossil fuels in order to boil water. Steam then pushes the turbine. Later the steam is collected later in the loop, allowed to cool, and then returned to the water reservoir. More modern and renewable alternatives are found in hydroelectric dams and wind turbines.

A major exception that comes to mind is solar power generated through photovoltaic cells. Instead of taking mechanical power and turning it into electrical power, photovoltaic cells absorb photons to excite electrons (assuming the photons are of sufficiently high frequency). Commercially-available solar panels tend to be of relatively low efficiency (<20%), although far more efficient solar panels are being researched and developed.

Concentrating solar power (CSP) takes us back to our heat-a-fluid-and-then-have-it-flow-around-in-a-loop roots. Well, not exactly, and not always. Steam turbines are indeed used for solar thermoelectricity, but CSP has also been used on air turbines, photovoltaic cells, molten salts, and Stirling engines (described surprisingly well in Wikipedia). CSP is also being looked at as a way to desalinize ocean water into freshwater (very necessary as freshwater supplies continue to dwindle and ocean levels continue to rise).

In general, concentrating solar power is still more efficient than solar power from photovoltaic cells (ignoring possible future next-generation photovoltaics). Given the noisiness of a wind turbine in an urban setting, and the low efficiency of commercial solar panels (combined with the fact that this is Canada, with limited hours of sunlight already), I've always wanted a miniature CSP generator to play around with.

Amazingly, Sopology has a portable parabolic trough-style CSP generator. Additionally, they have a rooftop-mounted product as well.

Equally cool (or hot) and infinitely cheaper, if one is looking simply for a solar-powered heater to help keep costs down during a Canadian winter, is a self-made heater made partially from old soda cans.

Finally, I'm not sure how many people know this, but the bottom curve of a soda can is typically parabolic in shape. As such, if one can find soda cans that are not dinged up, a person could hypothetically polish the bottoms of soda cans until they are reflective and then build an array of parabolic mirrors. You never know what you could build... just think MacGyver...

Peace and long life.