More Efficient Polymer Solar Cells Fabricated

                                                                            ScienceDaily (Dec. 4, 2010)

Researchers from Ames Laboratory and Iowa State University have developed a new texture to polymer solar cells.  The new texture will increase its efficiency by 20%. 

The new fabrication is a textured substrate that allows the cells to absorb more light and hold on to it longer.  The ridges of the new coating are less than a millionth of a meter high. 

Although the application of the ridges to polymer solar cells are new, the concept itself is old.  This is mainly used in silicon-based solar cells.  After many tries to get the light absorption maximized, Sumit Chaudhary and Kanwar Singh Nalwa got the texture, fabrication, and the size of the ridges just right.  

The researchers are very proud of their accomplishment and are hopeful of what's to come of it. 

"This may be an old idea we're using," Chaudhary said, "but it's never before been successfully implemented in polymer solar cells."

Opinion: I am glad to hear that our main alternate energy sources are being furthermore advanced.  A 20% efficiency increase is a major accomplishment and these researchers should be proud.  I hope these updated polymer solar cells get put to good use!

1.  Which solar cells are more efficient: silicon-based solar cells or polymer solar cells?

2.  What might be some possible reasons for the long amount of time it took to finally add ridges to the polymer solar cells?

3.  If you had a chance to choose between solar energy and coal to power your house, which one would you honestly choose and why?

A Green Team

The San Fransisco Giants are one of the greenest teams in all of major league sports. They play at AT&T Park (see picture on above). Although it may not look it, it is one of the greenest stadiums in the world. The stadium itself runs its scorboard on solar power, and recycles and composts nearly 50% of its waste. In addition it uses eco-friendly napkins, containers, utensils, and toilet paper. The stadium has enough efficiency features to cut the stadiums annual energy and water bills by 50%. Stadiums consume about as much energy as small cities, which means that that amounts to huge savings.

Green stadiums, are becoming increasingly popular in major league sports. Many teams are making their stadiums more energy efficent and also enviormentally friendly. Not only that but this is also raising conciousness amognst the fans. In fact, if the trend continues to grow at its current rate, sporting events may do more advertising for becoming enviornementally friendly than politics.

Given that half out population follows sports on a daily basis, sports has a great influence over the American population. If it were to push enviornmental progress, it might make a huge difference. Sports have had a major influence over the American people for pretty much as long as sports have been invented. They broke racial barriers nearly a decade before the nation as a whole did. It also starting including women before the women had a right to vote.

Green stadiums make sense. The sports team cuts their energy and water bills in half and at the same time help the enviornment. Unfortunatley not all teams see this benefit. For about every new stadium built, there are two more being built that are not energy efficient and enviornmentally friendly. a great example of this is the new Cowboys stadium that averages about $200,000 in monthly utility bills. It uses as much energy as the entire city of Santa Monica California.

Opinion: I think its great that stadiums are starting to make this change. They still use way to much energy but atleast its a start. Given the influence of sports in general, sports promoting "being green" may be just what the country needs to help start it on a greener path. I think its great that stadiums like AT&T park are making this change. If word starts to spread about it I think it will make a huge difference. The only part that confuses me is why stadiums would opt to not make their stadiums as "green" as possible. It decreases the annual bill emmensley, helps the enviornment, and sets a good example for the American public.

Questions:

1) Can you think of any other ways for stadiums to "go green" besides the ones mentioned in this article?

2) Can you think of a reason sports teams would not want to "go green"?

3)Can you think of some other examples of "green" stadiums besides AT&T Park?

ROCKET NOZZLES COULD PULL CARBON FROM AIR

An aerospace company is working to turn rocket nozzle technology into an interesting method for cleaning up the carbon-laced air emitted by coal-burning power plants.

Aerospace and defense company ATK (Alliant Techsystems Inc) is trying to develop a way “to use aerodynamic force, rather than chemicals, to separate out carbon dioxide from a power plant's air before it is released into the atmosphere.” This method could not only be extremely environmentally helpful, but also extremely cost-efficient compared to current methods.

ATK vice president Robert Bakos said “Today's carbon capture technology adds 80 percent to the cost per kilowatt hour of electricity delivered. With our approach, we could knock that down to 30 percent.”

Right now, 36 percent of US carbon emissions come from coal. And while mining for coal seems like an easier, better method than our reliance on foreign countries for oil, this will come back and bite us in the butt in the future where we will inevitably live in a coal constrained society.

Bakos explains the system, saying "When you accelerate air to very high speed, you have to expand the air very quickly. It cools the air and in some cases if you have water (vapor) in the air, it will make it condense into water or even snow. The same idea applies if you have carbon dioxide,"

Normally carbon dioxide is the gas we all know of but when frozen, it becomes dry ice. When cooling, the particles can be extracted from the air by various techniques, then stored, and then used in other applications. That’s what ATK’s plan is all about, they plan to “pressurize a power plant's exhaust gas, then put it through a rocket nozzle so that it expands and cools, allowing dry ice to form.”

And while these other techniques might not be available for years, the company will demonstrate this technology within 8 months, and then move onto a pilot program in power plants.

Opinion:

This seems to me like another weird but cool method that none of us have probably heard of. In logic and practice, it seems like a good, realistic plan but we will just have to wait and see. NNNNDDD

Questions:

1. What kinds of things could this dry ice be used for?

2. How crucial is this process to cut down emissions to us now? How about in 20 years?

3. What is another way to either extract carbon or lesson the amount of it going into the atmosphere?

http://news.discovery.com/tech/rocket-nozzles-carbon-capture.html

Onions into Fuel?

http://earthfirst.com/11-bizarre-sources-of-clean-energy-from-dead-turkeys-to-urine/

Did you ever think of this alternative energy source? I bet you didn't. As you see in the picture above it is onions, yes onions! A farmer find out that you can actually turn onion juice into fuel. The upfront cost of this process is killer to a farm actually. It is a total of around 9.5 million dollars for this process. On the bright side of this process is though it saves so much money on a farms annual electric bill.

Gills Onions (an onion farming company) saved a total of $700,000. These savings came from using the fuel from the onions to power refrigerators and for their lighting. The company then saved another $400,000 on their disposal costs. With all of these savings in hand, how do they even make the fuel from the onions? I'll tell you. They use an anaerobic digester, which converts the treated onion waste into bio gas and then finally it is turned into methane. After you have the methane is it put into a 600-kilowatt fuel cell to finally produce electricity.

I cannot believe this is even real. Onions for electricity? Who would have thought of that. I think a comparison to a real life situation for me would be turning off the faucet while I am brushing my teeth. I probably waste a lot of money right there in those seconds.

Questions:

1. Did you ever think this could happen?

2. Do you think that when more people read about this it will be used throughout the world?

3. Do you think you may ever use this?

On Our Radar: Skepticism on Carbon Offsets

picture: http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/energy-overview/hydroelectric/

article: http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/14/on-our-radar-skepticism-on-carbon-offsets/?partner=rss&emc=rss

The Clean Development Mechanism, created by the Kyoto Protocol, is a carbon offset program that allows companies in industrialized countries to sponsor reduction projects. When doing this in developing countries, they earn carbon credits. Since hydroelectric dams have been constructed in China, large amounts of credits have been given out. Some people say that this is an abuse of the system, because of the number of people/countries taking this opportunity.

An Italian engineer has signed a contract to build an experimental fusion reactor. It will begin to operate in a proposed decade, after the multibillion-dollar facility has been built in France. Full fusion power is expected to start much after this though.

A proposed "green investment bank" was brought up by the British Treasury. This would provide billions of dollars to the aid of financing clean energy products in the future. Low-carbon infrastructure is also a topic in this discussion.

Another negotiation being made is involving one of Europe's last remaining primeval forests, Bialowieza Forest. It is located on the border of Poland and Belarus. Environmentalists wish to build a national park that would cover a portion of the forest, but many others argue that this area should be protected, as it is like the last coral reef.

Opinion: There are many discussions going on about alternate energy sources, experimenting with energy, and funds for these things. I think that it is very good that these are being thought out because we really do need to find new ways for energy. About the hydroelectric dams, I am very approving. I also think that it was clever to give out credits to those countries that funded the multiple greenhouse gas reduction products. I believe that it is extremely necessary for countries to unite and resolve our problems involving energy. If we all work together, we will hopefully find new and improved ways to collect energy for everyday use.

1) Are the carbon credits a good or a bad thing?

2) What other countries have been working together to discover new energy sources?

3) New energy sources have been found. Are they cost efficient? How could this be changed?

South Africa Faces Water Crisis

Consumers in South America were told recently that their fruits and vegtables may be infected by Ecoli because they were irrigated by water contaminated with sewage. Their riverine eco-sytem is being infected by AMD (Acid Mine Drainage) and many of their cities are running out of natural water sources and they are running out of water to capture from the few sourses they do have.

The water is poorly managed by both ecological and water security standpoints. It is estimated that Guetang is predicted to become water stressed by 2011 and the rest of the country will follow closely behind.

They have tried to pass many laws to help protect their limited water sources but they have all failed in one way or another. The main problem is their water cleaning system is broking. The water just goes through a tratment plant that has not been updated for the increased demand from broadening access to water bourne sewage. The water is not sufficiently cleaned. The barely treated water now enters rivers and dams. Only about 3% of sewage plants opperate at a suitable level and only a little more than half the drinking water is of moderate quality.

Opinion: I think America should help chip in to help South Africa. They are in a difficult situation and the only way they can get out of it is with the help from the United States and other countries. if we want to stop the water crisis in the world we need to start with the places that need it most like South Africa.

Questions:
1)What do you think are some reasons that South Africa cannot update all their sewage plants?
2)What do you think is the best way to fix their problem?
3) Do you think the U.S. has a obligation to help South America? Why or why not?

Slide in EPA Clean Water Criminal Enforcement Continues Under Obama

picture: http://askmissa.com/2010/04/06/aveda-institute-washington-dc-hosts-fundraisers-to-support-clean-water-initiatives/

article: http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/10/25/25greenwire-slide-in-epa-clean-water-criminal-enforcement-83471.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Under the Obama administration, criminal enforcement of federal water-pollution is now in place, according to the EPA. 32 new Clean Water Act convictions have been reported also. The last count had been 42, and this year is down from 28 to 21. Nearly 60 percent of these cases have been dropped recently.

All "navigable" waters are protected by this law, and this causes controversy. Congress has repeatedly failed in eliminating the word "navigable."

With Obama's consent, EPA is now going to toughen the enforcement of our nation's water pollution laws by working to close legal loopholes, hiring more investigators, and bringing more cases against polluters. This is being done to decrease the amount of legal ambiguities that have dodged the Clean Water Act enforcement.

Opinion: I think it's great that the number of polluters has gone down, but it's not good to hear that people have been getting away with polluting. At least the EPA is working on fixing this problem, and making sure that everyone pays for their actions. To me, polluting water is a crime that should be accounted for. Another thing that was brought to my attention was the fact that it's only illegal to pollute a "navigable" waterway. This means that streams, ponds, and such aren't protected! This is a problem that should be fixed in my opinion.

1) Can you find any more information regarding the number of people accused for polluting waters?

2) Do you think that it's a good or a bad thing that the numbers of polluters (caught) have gone down? Does this mean that there are less, or just less caught?

3) What else do you think could fix this problem if there is a way?