CONFIDENTIAL Alert: CETI/Patterson Cell

/0 Comments/in , /by

UFTO CONFIDENTIAL Alert:

CETI/Patterson Cell publicity surge expected soon

April 17, 1996

TO: UFTO MEMBERS

As you know, the Patterson “new hydrogen energy” Cell was featured on ABC TV news and the Wall Street Journal back in early February, and their basic U.S. patent (No. 5,494,559) was awarded Feburary 27.

(UFTO provided copies of videotapes and a general information package on cold fusion to those who wanted them — see UFTO Bulletin #18, February 2, 1996, and the UFTO Comment “Advances in Cold Fusion.”)

Another blitz of publicity is expected to occur at the end of April, so you may want to be prepared to respond to inquiries. We don’t have any insights about what new developments if any that the anticipated news stories will talk about.

Meanwhile, rumor has it that CETI’s unorthodox business style is making it very difficult for other organizations to come to any kind of terms with them. Also, there are now reports that the calorimetry may not have been done with sufficient care and attention to details, even in the independent university tests, so claims of “over unity” energy production are yet to be solidly confirmed.

ENECO PROPOSAL

In another week or two, Eneco expects to have a more specific proposal for their “Survey of the State of the Art” review of cold fusion, along the lines of their outline I sent you with the March Bulletin. I will give Eneco your names and addresses so they can contact you about it, but otherwise this will be a matter between you and them.

Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion Study

/0 Comments/in , /by

DOE Seeks US Power Company for Adv. PFBC repowering design study

Commerce Business Daily 4/13/96

The DOE is seeking a volunteer U.S. power industry electrical generation company interested in participating in a site specific study to develop a conceptual design for Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation Pressurized Fluidized Bed Combustion (PFBC) technology as a coal fueled repowering concept at the actual power industry company’s electrical generation site.

The site should be well-suited to such a repowering. Site selection preferred characteristics should align to the following: (1) Coal – Fueled Plant, (2) Currently Operating, (3) Subcritical Steam Plant, (4) 100 TO 300 MWe Single Unit Capacity or multiple units with combined capacity in this range, and (5) Medium to High Sulfur content in Fuel. The DOE and power industry participant will visit the site and develop lists of the necessary information about the plant, operations, fuels, and regional economics to allow preparation of the evaluation.

The DOE will work with the participant company to develop generation production costing evaluations to establish the capacity factor for each option for the unit dispatched using the host participant’s particular operating environment. This will be used to develop meaningful yearly projections of expected use, allow evaluation of the number of start-stop cycles avoided because of the improved dispatch with the repowering technologies, and to develop industry-method-based economic comparisons of the options. The DOE will develop a conceptual design and economic evaluation using procedures familiar to electrical generation company planners. The DOE will evaluate the technical requirements for equipment/plant compatibility as well as the economics and schedule requirements for a repowering project. Advantages and practical aspects of repowering will be determined. Issues such as remaining equipment life’ demolition requirements, spare parts requirements, permitting, and dispatch requirements will be addressed.

All power company participant information will be conducted under policies that would provide strict nondisclosure of information these companies identify as being ”company proprietary information.” The power plant site will not actually be modified, but sufficient detail will be developed to show the feasibility of upgrading the participant’s site to Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation PFBC technology.

A final report summarizing all study activities will be prepared and submission of a technical paper for publication on this work, and attendance at a conference is suggested by the DOE.

If your company is interested in a volunteer partnership with the DOE to develop a conceptual design for High Efficiency Advanced Cycle 2nd Generation PFBC technology as a repowering concept, please respond in writing providing background information about your company along with information regarding the proposed repowering site (e.g., coal fuel type, limestone/dolomite availability, repowering unit size (MWe)).

To be considered for this volunteer partnership your response must be received no latter then 4:00 P.M. EDT on May 3, 1996. All questions concerning this matter should be addressed to Mr. Robert Travers at (301) 903-6166, DOE Office of Fossil Energy.

Brookhaven National Laboratories

/0 Comments/in , /by

From: UA4G924 –EPRI Date and time 04/11/96 15:25:11
To: UFTO MEMBERS
SUBJECT: Brookhaven Offers Nucl. Matls Metallurgy

UFTO has just received an invitation to a kickoff workshop at Brookhaven National Lab (Long Island NY) for MAGNUM — the Brookhaven Metallurgical Analysis Group for Nuclear Utilities Materials…to establish a new working relationship with the nuclear utility industry.

The workshop will be held at Brookhaven on April 25, 8:30 am-3:00pm. Plan to fly in to Long Island MacArthur Airport at Islip the night before….or LaGuardia or JFK.

They have a detailed proposal to form a “Utility Contract Group”, focused on failure analysis/Root cause analysis, life extension and aging, and independent surveillance/Monitoring.

If you would like a copy of the proposal and workshop agenda, contacts are:

C.L. Snead, 516-344-3502; snead@bnl.gov

Carl Czajkowski, 516-344-4420, czajkow@bnl.gov

Sincerely yours,

Edward Beardsworth, Consultant

951 Lincoln Ave___________Tel 415-328-5670___Fax 415-328-5675

Palo Alto CA 94301________EMAIL: edbeards@epri.epri.com

IPCC Report, Carbon Mitigation

/0 Comments/in , /by
MANY ALTERNATIVES FOR CO2 CUTS, SAYS IPCC PANEL
Substantial cuts in global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the leading greenhouse gas implicated in climate change, can be achieved over the next 30 years through a variety of technology and policy options at little or no increase in cost over business as usual, according to Working Group II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
In its new “Summary for Policymakers,” released in November, the panel examines several alternatives for world energy supply through the year 2100. All options reviewed envision very large growth in energy from “intermittent renewables” (wind and solar) over the next century.
Global energy use is a major contributor to the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. According to the report, 385 EJ exajoules; one exajoule is equal to 45 million tons of coal or 170 million barrels of oil of energy were consumed worldwide in 1990, resulting in the release of six billion tons of carbon 22 billion tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Added the report, “Future energy demand is anticipated to continue to grow, at least through the first half of the next century. The IPCC . . . projects that without policy intervention, there could be significant growth in emissions from the industrial, transportation, and commercial/residential buildings sectors.”
In 1992, the IPCC developed six energy scenarios based on different supply assumptions. All but one (a case with very low population and economic growth) showed substantial increases in CO2 emissions, from 22 billion tons in 1990 to a range of 36 billion tons to 128 billion tons per year in 2100.
Working Group II, however, found that emissions could be restrained well below all of the 1992 IPCC projections, even with high future energy demand. It developed five new scenarios of a Low CO2-Emitting Energy Supply System (LESS), which it said are “‘thought experiments’ exploring possible global energy systems.”
In the LESS scenarios, world population grows from 5.3 billion in 1990 to 10.5 billion by 2100. Economic growth, in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), jumps to 25 times 1990 levels by 2100, with 13-fold increases in industrialized countries and 70-fold increases in developing countries. Heavy use is made of energy efficiency measures in all scenarios. According to the working group, “Analysis of these variants leads to the following conclusions:
o “Deep reductions of CO2 emissions from energy supply systems are technically possible within 50 to 100 years, using alternative strategies.
o “Many combinations of the options identified in this assessment could reduce global CO2 emissions from fossil fuels from about 22 billion tons to about 15 billion tons by 2050, and to about seven billion tons by 2100.
o “Higher energy efficiency is underscored for achieving deep reductions in CO2 emissions, for increasing the flexibility of supply side combinations, and for reducing overall energy system costs. . .”
Added the report, ” . . . Within the wide range of future energy prices, one or more of the scenarios would plausibly be capable of providing the demanded energy services at estimated costs that are approximately the same as estimated future costs for current conventional energy.”
The report spoke in positive terms of renewable energy sources, noting in part, “Solar, biomass, wind, hydro, and geothermal technologies already are widely used. In 1990, renewable sources of energy contributed about 20% of the world’s primary energy consumption, most of it fuelwood and hydropower.
“Technological advances offer new opportunities and declining costs for energy from these sources. In the longer term, renewable sources of energy could meet a major part of the world’s demand for energy. Power systems can easily accommodate limited fractions of intermittent generation, and with the addition of fast-responding backup and storage units, also higher fractions.”
Each of the LESS scenarios sees substantial growth in intermittent renewables. By the year 2025, in the nuclear- intensive LESS forecast–the worst of the five for intermittent renewables–wind and solar would deliver 34.8 EJ (about 3.2 trillion kWh annually, or more electric power than the U.S. uses today), worldwide, and by the year 2100, 103.9 EJ (9.5 trillion kWh). In the biomass-intensive, gas-intensive, and coal- intensive scenarios, intermittent renewables are projected to deliver 37.1 EJ (3.4 trillion kWh) annually by 2025 and 163.2 EJ (15 trillion kWh) by 2100. And in the high-demand LESS scenario, intermittents deliver 37.1 EJ in 2025 and 318.3 EJ (29 trillion kWh) in 2100.
Continues the report, “The literature provides strong support for the feasibility of achieving the performance and cost characteristics assumed for energy technologies in the LESS constructions, within the next two decades, though it is impossible to be certain until the research and development is complete and the technologies have been tested in the market.
“Moreover, these performance and cost characteristics cannot be achieved without a strong and sustained investment in research, development, and demonstration (RD&D). Many of the technologies being developed would need initial support to enter the market, and to reach sufficient volume to lower costs to become competitive.”
“Second Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers: Impacts, Adaptations and Mitigation Options” is available from IPCC Working Group II Technical Support Unit, 300 D Street, SW, Suite 840, Washington, DC 20024, USA, phone (202) 651-8260, fax (202) 554-6858, e-mail <ipcc@usgcrp.gov>.
(The preceding is from the electronic edition of WIND ENERGY WEEKLY, Vol. 14, #678, 25 December 1995, published by the American Wind Energy Association.)

Bulletin #20 – Tampa Meeting UFTO Topics

/0 Comments/in , /by

UFTO Bulletin #20

April 2, 1996

To: UFTO Members:

. . in this issue: . . . . . . . . .

Tampa Meeting UFTO Topics

 

1. TAMPA!! April 24-26. UFTO MEMBERS MEETING

& BREAKTHROUGH TECHNOLOGIES CONFERENCE.

– If you haven’t already, please fill out and return the attached form. Especially needed–your inputs for the UFTO MEMBERS MEETINGAGENDA.

2. WELCOME A NEW MEMBER: The Kansas Electric Utility Research Program (KEURP) joined UFTO this week. KEURP is made up of the electric utility companies in the state of Kansas.

3. “Mideast Oil Forever” is the title of an excellent article in the April 96 issue of Atlantic Monthly, but Joseph Romm and Charles Curtis of DOE. It takes on the current Congress’ s actions to cut renewable/sustainable energy research, pointing out that another major oil crisis is highly likely. Be sure your planning group knows about it. And maybe send it to your congressman? (I can provide copies if you have trouble getting the magazine.)

4. Also for planners (and yourselves), the Energy Analysis Program at L. Berkeley Labs has its new ’95 Annual Report available. Most of you should have received a letter from them, updating their mailing list and offering to send it. Call Karen Olson 510-486-5974.

5. Two new “UFTO TOPICS” reports are enclosed–one on “International” and another on “Buildings”. It only takes me a few minutes to do one of these, so don’t hesitate to ask.

Any more takers who want to try out the database? If you don’t want to get Filemaker Pro 3.0 (PC or Mac — it only costs about $150), I can create an “export” file of the data in any of several formats. Caution–spreadsheet formats usually limit the amount of text in a cell, so a lot of information would be lost. I have more details on this if you want it.

EXPORT FORMAT OPTIONS

Tab-Separated text

Most applications

Comma-Separated Text **
BASIC programs, and Claris Impact
SYLK
Spreadsheet programs, including Excel
DBF
dBASEIII and dBASEIV
DIF
Spreadsheet programs like VisiCalc
WKS
Lotus 1-2-3
BASIC
Microsoft BASIC programs

(** likely to have a problem with commas in the data)

SEE YOU IN TAMPA!

P.S. Anybody going to the Green Pricing Conf.? The SMES User’s Conf.?

 

CADDET (Centre for the Analysis and Dissemination of Demonstrated Energy Technologies) is an International Energy Agency (IEA) program focusing on promising new technologies that have been demonstrated in real-life conditions and where monitored technical and financial results are available. THE U.S. is one of 15 countries participating. Now there are two distinct parts of CADDET, Energy Efficiency and Renewables.

The Energy Efficiency part of the U.S. program is operated by Oak Ridge.
Contact: Marilyn Brown 423-576-8152 brownma@ornl.gov
or Julia Kelley 423-574-6966 j4u@ornl.gov
US web site: www.ornl.gov/CADDET/caddet.html
Main site: www.caddet-ee.org

The Renewables part is operated in the U.S. by NREL.
Contact: David Warner 303-275-4373 david_warner@nrel.gov.
US web site: www.nrel.gov/caddet
Main site: www.caddett.co.uk/re/

They can provide brochures and free newsletter subscriptions.

There are two computerized databases called the CADDET Register, providing information on over 2,000 demonstrated energy technology projects. Newsletters are published quarterly, covering a specific technology and featuring international articles, news items and meetings notices. (Upcoming issues will cover advanced lighting and industrial controls. Recent topics included motors, heat pumps, and district heating/cooling.) There are more than 200 brochures on selected technologies, many of which describe U.S. technologies. A number of Analysis Reports provide in-depth assessments.

Alarm Filtering — “Frontline Solutions” is small startup company recently spun off from INEL to commercialize alarm processing methods developed at INEL called The Alarm Management Environment (TAME). It uses artificial intelligence techniques to filter (prioritize and reduce) alarms in process facilities such as power plants, electrical distribution and chemical processing facilities. The company offers the knowledge engineering necessary to extract plant specific expertise from operators and encode it into the software. The group published a paper describing the system at the American Power Conference (April 1995), and a DOS demo disk is available on request. Contact Michael Bray, Frontline Solutions, 208-529-2266, bray@srv.net

New Factory America is a concept under development at the Kansas City Plant (a DOE manufacturing facility managed by Allied Signal) to create an integrated “toolbox” of software technologies that will give small to midsized manufacturers the same capabilities as the very large ones. The low cost software already exists in a pre-alpha test version, and can be demoed on a laptop. The software can receive complicated 3-D solid model data sets from the internet to respond to rquests for quotes. After the contract is awarded, the supplier can use the same software to communicate product definition directly to automated machinery (e.g. machine tool controller, plastic injection molding machine, or automated pick and place machines).

A plan for a “Virtual Enterprise Integration” includes the “Desktop Manufacturing System” with an “Information Based Manufacturing Instrastructure”. (This could be a good initiative for a local economic development program.) Contact Scott Wright, 816-997-2549.

Energy Efficient Lighting (DOE/GO-10095-056) is a brief 8 page technology overview published by the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Clearinghouse. Call 800-363-3732 for a free copy (ask for “FS-141”) and a list of their other publications.

FUEL CELLS

• METC’s Web page is a very thorough source of information on fuel cells (not PEM) and other Fossil power programs.(http://www.metc.doe.gov)

Mark Williams, Product Manager, Fuel Cells, DOE/METC, tel 304-285-4747; (mwilli@metc.doe.gov) manages the DOE /Fossil fuel cell effort.

One useful item–a listing of upcoming conferences. For example:
– SOFC Course (ceramic ion membranes) London UK, July 1-3, ’96
– Fuel Cells in Transportation, Chicago, September 17-19, ’96. (call Intertech, 207-781-9800)
– 2nd European SOFC Forum, Oslo Norway, May 6-10, ’96
– GRI/EPRI Workshop, Tempe AZ, April 2-3, ’96. (Contractor’s conf. — invitation only)

• Also from METC — the Fuel Cells Forum is a free unmoderated email list for exchange of ideas and information about fuel cell technology. To subscribe:
– send an internet email message to: listproc@lists.metc.doe.gov
– leave the SUBJECT line blank
– In the body of the message enter: subscribe fuelcells fname lastname

Results in a few email notes per week.

• Fuel Cell Advanced Turbine System (FCATS) is a new idea for generation in the >100 MW range, combining a fuel cell with an advanced turbine. The fuel cell is used as a topping cycle, in effect acting as a combustor whose 2000 °C exit temperature feeds into the turbine. METC held a workshop on this recently, and the proceedings will be available shortly. For more information, contact Mark Williams, Product Manager, Fuel Cells, DOE/METC, tel 304-285-4747; mwilli@metc.doe.gov.

• DOE Advanced Fuel-Cell Commercialization Working Group

Final Report DOE/ER-0643, and 0644, March ’95 (2 volumes-one is an executive summary).

The Office of Planning & Analysis/Energy Research, (ER — the part of DOE that does basic research), undertook a comprehensive review of the entire state of the art of fuel cell technology to identify gaps in the R&D programs. They assembled an expert panel from industry and the labs, and Dr. Sol Penner of UC San Diego prepared the final report.

For a copy, contact Don Freeman, DOE, Energy Research, 301-903-3156,don.freeman@er.doe.gov.

• Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Letter, published monthly by Peter Hoffman, of Rhinecliff NY, is in its 11th year. Subscription price is $195/year. Their web page shows the table of contents and one article from each issue (http://solstice.crest.org/renewables/thl/index.html). 914-876-5988; hfcletter@mhv.net

• The New Technology Demonstration Program in DOE Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) issued one of its Federal Technology Alerts on “Natural Gas Fuel Cells”, encouraging federal building managers to consider fuel cells as “an environmentally benign energy conservation technology ….sustainable …can help the bottom line” especially where the thermal energy can be utilized, where there are strict air-quality rules, and where reliability is important.

The Alerts are short, comprehensive, written for a non technical audience, explaining about new technologies that are ready for implementation and where they can be applied. Other titles in the series include: Liquid Refrigerant Pumping, Ground Source Heat Pumps for Commercial Applications; Residential Heat Pump Water Heating; Ozone Treatment of Cooling Water; Refrigerant Subcooling, and Polarized Refrigerant Oil Additives. More are in preparation. To receive copies, and to be put on the mailing list,

contact Karen Walker, PNNL (Wash. DC), 202-646-7794.

 

FUEL CELLS — Money Available

• METC — CLIMATE CHANGE FUEL CELL PROGRAM is soliciting applications for financial assistance grants from DOD for installing fuel cells. Offerers must be commited to purchase, install, operate and maintain fuel cell plant(s) with a combined capacity rated between 100 and 3,000 kW.

For awards through September 30, 1996, approximately $15,000,000 is available. Grant values will be $1,000/kW, provided that the grant shall not exceed a third of the total project costs (unit cost, delivery, installation, and one year of precommercial operation).

The Application/Information Package includes application forms to be submitted, the 1994 Conference Report language, and other information needed for preparation of applications. The Application/Information Package will be available on the Internethttp://www.metc.doe.gov/business/solicita.html after March 27, 1996. If Internet access is not available, a 3.5” diskette in WordPerfect, version 5.2. may be requested from the contract specialist Diane Manilla by fax (304-285-4683) or telephone at (304-285-4086). The Package may also be obtained from DOE atjohn.bashista@hq.doe.gov.

Applications may be submitted at any time in the next year. Selections for the first round will be made by July 30, 1996, and awards made by September 30, 1996. The second round of selections and awards will be made after September 30, 1996, contingent upon availability of appropriated funds.

3/22/96 (approx) (Federal Register)

 

• BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT FOR PROTON EXCHANGE MEMBRANE (PEM) FUEL CELL POWER SOURCES 3/21/96 Commerce Business Daily
Contact: Gary Byram, Contract Specialist, 703-704-2960
Ana Kimberly, Contracting Officer, 703-704-2964.

R&D of technology to demonstrate small Proton Exchange Membrane (PEM) Fuel Cell Power Sources. The Army currently has no standard refuelable power sources in this range and utilizes batteries. Power sources that are refuelable, with higher energy densities than rechargeable batteries will enhance military capabilities. The power sources sought are complete systems: including the fuel cell, fuel supply, controls, safety features, packaging, voltage regulator, automatic start/stop, refueling procdures, commercial operating manuals and other features so that the power sources may be used in technical demonstrations. Two categories of power source are desired. A low power demonstrator is desired that will produce 6 Volts, 50 watts, and 200 watt-hours. Target weight is 1 kg. A higher power demonstrator that will produce 28 Volts, 150 watts and 600 watt-hours is also sought. Target weight is 2.5 kg. The operational range of these demonstrators will be from 32-120 degrees farenheight and from 5-100 per cent realtive humidity. The systems produced under this solicitation will be utilized to demonstrate small PEM Fuel Systems in 4Q98. Contracts are expected to be 18 months in duration and produce a total of four units at each/either size. Proposals may address one or both sizes. It is anticipated that no more than two awards will be made under this solicitation. More awards may be made depending on the responses. Proposals must be submitted to US CECOM Aquisition Center, Ground Support Branch, AMSEL- AC-CC, 10109 Gridley Road, Suite 200, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5845 and must be received no later than 10 May 1996. Questions concerning this solicitation may be faxed to Richard Jacobs at 703-704-3794. Telephone calls will not be honored.

 

SERDP — Strategic Environmental Research & Development Program; Dept. of Defense

SERDP was established in 1990 to address defense-related environmental needs and to effect transfer of defense-related technologies to/from the private sector. It is a DOD research program planned and executed in full partnership with DOE and EPA, to work on the department’s highest priority mission-impacting environmental requirements. In 1993, these evolved to six key environmental “thrust areas:” Cleanup, Compliance, Conservation, Pollution Prevention, Renewables, and Global Environmental Change. With the recent budget cuts, however, from $160M/year to $60M/year, the last two are being wrapped up in 1996.

The program is managed by an Executive Director, who works in the Office of the Director, Defense Research and Engineering, DOD. There is a high level multi-agency Executive Working Group (DOD, DOE, EPA, others). Planning groups in each thrust area start with DOD’s high priority technology needs, and elicit proposals from any and all Federal agencies. Proposals must come from a Federal agency (or lab), but can and usually do involve partners from industry, small business or academia.

SERDP actively disseminates Program information through a newsletter (SERDP Information Bulletin), symposia and its own Internet site (http://prop.wes.army.mil/serdp/home.html), reporting on work done in federal Labs and in private companies. Actual tech transfer and intellectual property (e.g. licensing, cradas, etc.) are handled by the agency or lab where the project initiated. SERDP’s role is research, i.e., to reaching proof of scientific principle, and focusing on high priority, generic environmental problems experienced by more than one branch of the military.

SERDP results thus provide a selective compilation of the work of many agencies of government. They have begun to feature “Success Stories”, and have a list of all publications that have resulted since the inception of the program. There is also a Proceedings of their first annual Symposium, held in April ’95, and featuring a large number of presentations about specific environmental technologies.

Some examples: Non chemical paint stripping with high pressure water;

Encapsulation of hazardous metals in hydrophobic clay;

Advanced acoustic heat pump;

Next generation fire surpression;

Nontoxic anti fouling coatings.

 

Call for more information:

John Harrison, Executive Director
SERDP Program Office
901 N. Stuart St #303
Arlington, VA 22203
703-696-2117
703-696-2114 fax

 

http://www.wes.army.mil/serdp/home.html

 

International Climate Change Exhibition

/0 Comments/in , /by
From: FUELCELL–SMTP Date and time 03/27/96 10:15:00
To: EDBEARDS–EPRINET BEARDSWORTH, ED
Subject: International Climate Change Exhibit I am writing to draw your attention to the International Climate Change Technology Exhibit being held as part of the second Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP2), Geneva, Switzerland, July 8-18, 1996.
Participation in the exhibit will provide you with a unique opportunity to meet key decision-makers from around the world who set priorities and implement national and global climate change projects.
Some 1500 delegates will attend COP2, including members of national delegations, international financial institutions and United Nations and inter-governmental organizations.
The exhibit is being organized by the Government of Canada, in cooperation with the Climate Change Secretariat. Its purpose is to encourage an exchange of ideas between delegates and exhibitors on the role of proven technologies, services and project concepts that help control greenhouse gas emissions.
Exhibits will include technologies that reduce all forms of greenhouse has emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O) across all relevant industrial sectors. Most are expected to target energy efficiency and energy substitution or the reduction, capture and reuse/conversion of greenhouse gasses.
The exhibit will consist of between 15-20 booths through which three groups of exhibitors will be rotated during the period of the COP. Thus a maximum of 60 organizations from around the world will be able to participate.
For further information, please consult the International Climate Change Exhibit World Wide Web site (http://www.bnet.ca/climate) or contact:
Roy Woodbridge
International Climate Change Exhibit Office Suite A
78 George Street Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1N 5W1
Tel: 613-789-1660 Fax: 613-789-0539 email: climate@bnet.ca

Private TVA, BPA – Mar 1996

/0 Comments/in , /by

Government urged to privatize federal electric utilities; sale of TVA, PMAs would benefit consumers, taxpayers, says study Business & News Editors/Energy & Government Writers

LOS ANGELES–(BUSINESS WIRE)–March 14, 1996–The federal government is the nation’s largest producer of electric power, via the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and five power marketing administrations (PMAs), yet they are poorly managed and grossly inefficient, and receive substantial federal subsidies to insulate them from pricing competition, according to the study “Federal Power: The Case for Privatizing Electricity,” released Thursday by the Los Angeles-based Reason Foundation.

The Clinton administration, in its 1996 budget, has proposed privatizing the four smaller PMAs and restructuring the Bonneville Power Administration into a federal corporation similar to the TVA.

According to Dr. Douglas Houston, author of the Reason Foundationstudy and professor of business economics at the University of Kansas:

“The primary reason to shift the assets of the five PMAs and the TVA into the private sector is to build them into energy organizations that cannot evade commercial accountability.”

“By delaying privatization and hiding behind fences, the TVA will not face a true-market test to increase the value of its assets.”

As the study indicates, federal electricity providers will be much better equipped to cope with fast-approaching electricity deregulation as they are transformed into entrepreneurial companies.

The United States, however, lags behind many other countries in electric-power privatization. Worldwide asset privatization in the electric-utility industry totaled $12.9 billion in 1995, leading all other industries.

Many nations, from Chile to Great Britain, have entered ambitious electric-power privatization programs for two primary reasons: (1) to raise capital to reduce their national debts, and (2) to improve the efficiency and performance of their electric-power industries.

According to the study, the sale of all U.S. federal power enterprises would raise between $15 billion and $30 billion, which could be applied to reducing the national debt. William Malec, former chief financial officer of the TVA, estimated that the TVA alone could sell for as much as $10.5 billion.

In addition to a divestiture of federal power assets, the report recommends the removal of tax advantages to government-owned utilities and cooperatives, which would increase future federal income-tax revenue flow by an estimated $3 billion per year; states would gain another $2 billion per year.

“Rate shock to formerly subsidized federal electricity customers can be minimized by transitional price caps and stock- purchase options,” said Houston.

“Privatization of federal power is generally viewed as a win-win proposition,” explained Robert Poole, president of the Reason Foundation and an authority on federal privatization.

“Consumers nationwide will benefit from the lower prices provided by enhanced access to federal transmission lines for long-distance power sales. The environment will benefit, as the removal of subsidies leads to energy conservation.”

According to Houston, “The near-term prospects for electric- power privatization are promising, but as the industry undergoes deregulation, we still have many federal power assets that are interfering with an emerging competitive process; this damages the foundation of a nation’s productivity and its capacity for economic growth.”

Related studies that address the issue of electric-utility privatization include “Toward Accountability and Efficiency: Reform of the Bonneville Power Administration,” “Public vs. Private: Alternative Ownership Scenarios for Electric Utilities” and “Privatization of the Tennessee Valley Authority.”

Copies are available for $15 (plus $1.50 s/h) each and may obtained by calling the Reason Foundation at 310/391-2245.

The Reason Foundation is a national public-policy research organization with a practical, market-based approach and an outside Washington perspective. Founded in 1978 and based in Los Angeles, the Reason Foundation has earned a reputation for sound economic research and a how-to approach that benefits policy-makers and elected officials who require practical solutions.

 

CONTACT: The Reason Foundation, Los Angeles
Brandon Shamim, 310/391-2245

Bulletin #19 – Washington DC, Tampa Meeting, UFTO Topics, Cold Fusion

/0 Comments/in , /by

In this issue: . . . . . . . . .
Washington DC Tampa Meeting UFTO Topics Cold Fusion

1. My Washington trip was packed with meetings, including the “Technology Partnering” conference. A number of interesting developments, as outlined in the attached notes.

2. The Breakthrough Conference is taking shape nicely. EPRI and EEI are now sponsors, and we’re working on DOE. (See the ad on page 45 in the February Electrical World.) You’ll receive a registration package in the mail soon.

PLEASE: respond to me about who’ll come to Tampa, and in particular who will be coming to the UFTO MEETING on Wednesday April 24. And if dinner on Thursday sounds like a good idea. And on what we want to accomplish at our meeting.

3. I may be able to announce one or two new UFTO members soon. (It’s all but certain, but I’d prefer to be certain.)

4. Filemaker! Enclosed is an example of a “cut & paste” topic report on NOx and SOx, from the new UFTO Topics database, now in “pre-prerelease.”

Alpha testers wanted. Prerequisite — familiarity with, and your own copy of, Filemaker Pro 3.0 for PC or Mac.

It’s important that everyone understand that this is strictly “as-is” software. You may prefer to simply ask me to do topic reports for you, rather than deal with the database yourself.

5. Many of you asked for copies of the Cold Fusion tapes and materials. Any thoughts or reactions?

ENECO, the company that provided the 1994 CBC tape and put together the booklet, is exploring the possibility of doing a state-of-the-art survey for interested parties, on a multi-client basis. A two page proposed outline is enclosed. The price hasn’t been set yet –that will depend on the number of subcribers and what their interests are. Probably in the neighborhood of $5K-$10K. Would your company want to participate? Let me know if you’re interested, and I can put you in touch with them.

6. See some new “UFTO Tech Nuggets” attached.

7. Upcoming events you might want to know about. (I could attend for you if you want.)
I have a little more information on each of these meetings if you want it….

• 1st Annual Conference of SMES Customer Interest Group, April 15-16, Chicago.
A half dozen manufacturers, Sandia and the US Air Force will be making presentations. Call 608-831-5773.

• DOE/EPRI Green Pricing Workshop, April 11-12, Golden CO. Open to anyone.

Call Lori Adams, EPRI Conferences, 415-855-8763.

 

• World Renewable Energy Congress, Denver, June 15-21. Call NREL 303-275-4358

 

UFTO Tech Nuggets

March 7, 1996

 

• Biochemical Upgrading of Petroleum (“BUP”)

Work at Brookhaven National Lab has shown that certain catalysts can effectively upgrade crude and processed oils in ways that have significant economic potential. These processes enchance lighter oil fractions, reduce organic sulfur and nitrogen content, and remove trace metals such as nickel and vanadium.

To date, processes have been demonstrated at 50 gallon bench scale. BNL, assisted by the Long Island Research Institute(LIRI), has set up a company and is seeking industrial partners. They’ve prepared a detailed commercialization plan that discusses a wide range of potential applications.

The Technology can be applied in upstream and downstream processing of oils and oil fractions, and in pretreatment of oils in many applications. Calculations show net financial benefits (i.e. after capital and operating costs) of $0.30 to $1.20 per barrel.from changing high sulfur oil into low sulfur oil.

Related technology can also treat waste streams from geothermal energy production, recovering valuable trace metals and converting geothermal sludges into commercially viable products.

Contact Ed Beardsworth, UFTO, or Phil Palmedo, LIRI, 516-361-6800

 

• Lighting Technology Screening Matrix (LTSM) is a software tool the calcualtes the life-cycle cost of an existing fixture and potential energy efficient replacements. Funded by the DOE Federal Energy Management Program, it was developed at the Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL). It can be ordered through the Battelle Memorial Institute at 1-800-451-3543. The price is $499.

• Small Gas Turbines for Distributed Generation Workshop, was held in San Francisco in February 1995, sponsored by EPRI, GRI, PG&E, and DOE. The 2-volume proceedings are available on request from Sargent and Lundy. Call J. N. Darguzas, 312-269-6902.

• CAGT? ICAD? Do these acronyms mean anything to you? See attached letter….