Observations from Bali: Where’s the Technology?

Now that policy-level representatives have arrived in Bali for the global warming negotiations, the press conferences at which they are featured like some many models strutting the boardwalk in Milan have also kicked off. Monday afternoon was the day in the sun for United States Senior Climate Negotiator and Special Representative Harlan Watson. Watching and listening as the world’s press attempted in vain to badger Watson into saying something meaningful was remindful of an admonition in the South, where I was raised: Never try to teach a pig to talk. It’s a waste of your time, and annoys the pig.

Watson was rigorously faithful to the Bush Administration’s insistence on addressing global warming through technology transfer, an approach that might have benefited the United States 25 or perhaps even 15 years ago, but no more. The sad truth is that having invented these technologies–or at least turned them from laboratory curiosities into commercially viable goods–the United States has frittered away its position of dominance and allowed them to fall into the hands of Germany, Japan, and other industrialized nations.

Consider where matters stood in 1990, for example. The United States was the world’s largest manufacturer solar photovoltaic cells, devices that turn sunlight into electricity (think of that small panel on your pocket calculator). It was also home to the world’s largest number of wind turbines and solar thermal generators, which use the sun’s heat to generate electricity. General Motors was on the verge of unveiling the world’s first truly practical battery-powered car, The Impact, later re-named EV-1. It was so heart-breakingly sleek that it could have traveled an estimated 100 to 110 miles on a gallon of gasoline, though that would have wasted its most precious asset: zero pollution. Yankee ingenuity also had developed an extremely clean way of burning coal called integrated gasification, combined cycle (IGCC). The list could go on and on (and those who wish to learn more can check out a copy of Green Gold , a book that Alan Miller and I wrote on the subject in the mid-1990s).

Today, all of that is history. The Germans are the world’s largest manufacturer of wind turbines, while the Japanese lead in solar photovoltaics. The solar thermal facility in California entered bankruptcy (though enough electricity is still being generated there to meet the residential needs of a city the size of San Francisco).

Two coal-fired IGCC plants have been built in the U.S., but roughly 160, almost all burning petroleum coke in nations with stringent air pollution laws, have been constructed elsewhere. EV-1 was scrapped by General Motors, and Toyota has quickly established a position of environmental dominance with its Prius and other hybrids.

The plain truth is that the United States has precious few advanced technologies sitting on its shelves to sell to other nations to address global warming. Want a smart bomb that can drop through a doorway from a height of 10,000 feet, talk to the U.S. Want a way to make electricity from sunlight or wind, or propel a car 60 miles on a single gallon of fuel, check with the Germans and Japanese–or the Spanish, Danes, Israelis and many others.

Harlan Watson is not alone in his ignorance of America’s plight. One hour after Watson strode off the stage, U.S. Senator and former Demcratic candidate for President John Kerry walked on. Soon, he was talking about the many advanced technologies that had been birthed by the acid rain trading program put in place by the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments. In truth, not a single solar or wind generator or even one conservation or energy efficiency program was adopted because of the trading program. More to the point, the lakes that were acid in 1990 and were supposed to have had life breathed into them by the trading program are still dead, and so are the forests.

About 15 years ago, the official charged with cleaning up Mexico City’s horrific air pollution described the differing attitudes of the businesses that would come calling on him. The Germans, he said, were genuinely interested in helping Mexico rid itself of the air pollution scourge. The Japanese also wanted to help, but wanted very much to sell their products. Americans, he added, wanted to sell their goods, and didn’t really care whether they solved the problem.

Perhaps it is this attitude that explains why the nation has allowed these and many other technologies to slip through its fingers. Surely, the likes of Watson, who shares George Bushes disdain for programs that would spur deployment of these technologies and, most importantly, save lives and slow global warming, bear a large share of the blame.

The loss of the United States could, however, be the gain for the rest of the world if only officials would start listening to–and most importantly, believing in–their own words. In truth,an economy based on zero-polluting technologies is today ours for the taking. Yes, electricity might cost more, and so too might other goods. Perhaps if the people of the world were to examine the option of committing themselves to zero pollution, they would vote against it, in the belief that it simply costs too much.

But rejecting an option for cost reasons is vastly different than maintaining it doesn’t exist. Zero pollution is a here and now option. It may require more research and development to make the technologies better, but nothing more is required to make them available. Just pick up the phone, call, say, Siemens or Canon. Place your order and zero pollution can be yours in a few weeks or months. It is there for the asking, now, not just for you, but for the world.

And therein lies the gravest sin committed by the likes of Watson and Bush. In their war against action to curb global warming, the first victim has been truth. And those who will pay the price for its loss are the world’s people, including those whom both Bush and Watson have taken a solemn oath to protect, Americans.
Re IGCC: http://www.powergeneration.siemens.com/press/press-pictures/igcc/

IGCC (Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle) is an innovative technology for environment-friendly power generation. In addition to power generation the gasification of fuels such as coal, oil and refinery residues can also be utilized to produce valuable syngas, which can serve as the basis for the production of hydrogen, methanol, diesel fuel and a wide variety of other chemical products.

So, too, it is with global warming. America it seems–the government, not its citizens–is intent on selling its program to the world, and do not care whether it solves the problems–or injures its own people.

=========

Seen in the Bali Convention Center, where negotiations are going on: every light fixture with a common, energy-wasting, pollution-producing conventional incandescent light bulb. Number of highly efficient compact fluorescent bulbs found: zero. These bulbs, by the way, were developed in the United States, but the largest manufacturers are Dutch, German and Japanese.

=========

Re emissions trading: http://www.healthandcleanair.org/emissions/marketing_failure.html

This Article is the first of several and is the result of a study I conducted over a six-month period starting in mid-2002 after it became apparent that President George W. Bush intended to seek repeal of several cornerstone provisions of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in favor of “trading,” an approach that confers on refineries, power plants, factories and other polluters the right to pollute.

Re solar pv installations: http://gsr.ren21.net/index.php?title=2006_Table_3

http://www.iea-pvps.org/ar05/usa.htm
According to PV News, U.S. PV production grew 10 % from 2004 to 2005, reaching 153 MW (Maycock, 2006). World production exceeded 1 700 MW in 2005. In part, market growth is being driven by innovations in technology and manufacturing that continue to increase efficiency, boost product lifetime and reliability, and simplify installation. As a result, average costs and prices declined to make solar power more competitive with conventional energy sources.

re wind turbines: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_turbine_manufacturers

List of wind turbine manufacturers

Re EV-1, a personal recollection: http://www.altfuels.org/events/testdriv/farewell.html

I have followed the story of the General Motors EV1 electric vehicle (EV) with the greatest of interest for over a decade, starting with the introduction of its predecessor, the Impact show-car, in 1990. I tried to talk my way into the “public beta test” of the Impact in 1994; I was at the Los Angeles Auto Show in 1996 when the EV1 was introduced to the public; I went to my local Saturn dealer for a look as soon as I heard they had arrived in late 1996; and when they became available for rent at EV Rental Cars in late 1998, I was one of the first customers in line (I wrote about the experience in the first of several test-drive reports that have appeared on this website). Sadly, General Motors and other automakers put a lot more effort into getting California’s Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) regulations watered down, repealed, or struck down in court than they ever did into actually marketing their ZEVs, or even making them readily available, and recently all the automakers have stopped making EVs (the sole exception being DaimlerChrysler’s Global Electric Motorcars division, which makes small low-speed EVs). General Motors never offered the EV1 for sale, only for lease, and a few years back they stopped renewing the leases, so the last ones are running out now and the cars will be gone from the road by the end of this year. Before they took back the EV1s from EV Rental Cars, I went there to rent one for a final drive.