When the cost of diesel skyrocketed to more than $4 a gallon, Travis Sweat fought back. Using knowledge from the Internet and recycled oil from fast-food restaurants, he made his own fuel for $1 a gallon.
“I’d heard of other people (making their own fuel), and I knew there were several different ways to do it,” said Sweat, who has run his 1997 Ford F250 on a blend of waste vegetable oil for seven months.
Free oil is the base
Sweat, a game warden from Griffin, Ga., gets free used liquid fryer oil from a friend who owns a restaurant. He uses vegetable, peanut and soybean oils. Hydrogenated oil can’t be used.
Sweat filters the oil twice and puts it through a water separator. It takes 30 minutes to process a 55-gallon batch of fuel. “Basically, I just pour a few things in a drum, filter it and I’m ready to go,” he said.
Sweat’s recipe is 80 percent oil, 15 percent to 20 percent diesel and 5 percent gasoline.
His fuel isn’t biodiesel, which is “harder to make and requires more chemicals,” he said. WVO fuel blend can only run in certain types of engines and injection systems, Sweat said. It won’t work at all in newer trucks.
A smooth ride
When Sweat switches his truck from diesel to his WVO blend, he likes the difference. “The engine gets really quiet and smooth, and it runs a lot better,” he said. “There used to be a rough idle at stop signs, and now there isn’t.”
Sweat’s wife, Stephanie, has faith in her husband’s homemade fuel. She must. She drives the truck to work and to run errands around town.
Sweat admits, though, his greatest concern is engine failure.
“It was a little scary at first,” he said. “If you blow a diesel engine, you’re looking at $5,000 to $10,000 to replace it.”
A matter of time
Sweat should be careful, said Dan Geller, a researcher with the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. From an engineering standpoint, the fuels he’s burning won’t work for long.
“The engineer in me says this is a bad idea because of the potential for disaster,” Geller said. “But the practical, environmental side of me says it’s great. It’s just not for the faint of heart.”
With WVO, not all the oil combusts, he said, and over time carbon builds up in the engine and will damage it.
The problem is chemical not physical. “The molecules in the oil are big molecules, relatively speaking, compared to diesel molecules,” Geller said. “You can thin it all you want, but you aren’t changing the molecule structure.”
Do you feel lucky?
Geller has met hundreds of people who have used WVO in their vehicles for up to five years with no problems. He also knows some who have had unsuccessful ventures with WVO and other homemade fuel recipes.
“If you’re mindful of what you’re doing and are very mechanically inclined, go ahead and try it,” he said. “I wouldn’t personally do it.”
Geller has conducted numerous experiments with biodiesel, he said, and would use it in his own vehicle. “With biodiesel, you go to the pump, you put it in and you don’t have to think about it.”
WVO blended fuel is better for the environment, runs much cleaner than petroleum, is a renewable resource and relieves some of our dependence on foreign oil, he said. “But you can get all the same advantages from biodiesel, and you don’t have to make it yourself.”
By Sharon Dowdy
University of Georgia
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Friday, December 12, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Deloitte Survey: Seventy-Three Percent of Voters Say America on the Wrong Track
/PRNewswire/ -- Voters feel the country is headed in the wrong overall direction by a five-to-one margin, according to a national survey from Deloitte's Oil & Gas industry group.
The Deloitte survey also identified the four most urgent issues facing the new presidential administration: the nation's economy, 84 percent; the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, 39 percent; health care, 26 percent; and energy, 19 percent (multiple responses were permitted; numbers do not add up to 100 percent).
The survey placed a special focus on the national energy situation, which voters believe is on the wrong track by a three-to-one margin -- 79 percent claiming that the nation's energy situation is in worse shape now than five years ago.
The survey shows that Americans have a particular passion for renewable energy, but may not realize the need for more hydrocarbons like oil and gas, which are projected to account for the majority of the world's transportation fuels through 2030. Given this fact, the new presidential administration could face a challenge meeting the public's short-term aspirations for renewable energy.
"It's clear from our survey that most voters believe renewable energy is the way of the future," said Gary Adams, vice chairman, oil and gas, Deloitte LLP. "While this is very important, many voters may not understand the current costs and complexities of developing renewable energy."
In the survey, renewables like solar power and wind power have an 86 percent favorability rating, consistent across all age and education groups. Moreover, a plurality of voters (41 percent) believe renewable energy is the cheapest type of energy today, with an additional 10 percentage points (51 percent overall) claiming renewable energy will be the cheapest energy source 25 years from now.
In contrast, the percentage of voters surveyed who believe oil and gas is currently the cheapest energy source trails renewables by 25 points (16 percent feel oil and gas is currently a cheap energy source). What is more, the percentage trails renewables by a full 45 points when voters look into the future (6 percent believe oil and gas will be a cheap energy source 25 years from now).
Adams points out that there is confusion among voters about the real costs of renewable energy sources. "Right now, renewables simply are not as cheap as fossil fuels, which adds to the challenge of satisfying the public's desire to move away from conventional oil and gas in a short time period."
When it comes to sustainability, oil and gas decline even further in voters' minds: 25 percent surveyed say oil and gas are a sustainable energy source today, but only 8 percent say the same will be true 25 years from now -- a 17 point drop.
Adams points out that America urgently needs a comprehensive energy policy that will promote investment in the development of economical alternative fuels, such as renewables and, at the same time, encourage local exploration and production of oil and gas to bridge to the gap to the future.
"The world will be primarily reliant on fossil fuels for at least two generations -- the bridge to tomorrow's new energy future depends on this. The key is to have a sensible plan to transition to a new, cleaner energy era. It is also clear that the oil and gas industry needs to do more to educate the public on the challenges ahead."
Deloitte's survey offers a few clues as to how voters would like go about this transition. First and foremost, voters widely agree on requiring more stringent and mandatory fuel economy standards for all cars sold in America. Most voters, especially younger ones, are also in favor of funding major clean energy projects despite high costs.
Surprisingly, the survey showed that oil and gas are viewed with less outright disdain than one might assume: Conventional oil and gas generally enjoy two-to-one support as an energy source among all voters surveyed, although the level of support is highest among those over the age of 55. At least one in three voters prefers using fossil fuels more efficiently rather than moving away from them. Older voters are also in favor of building new refineries to produce more gasoline.
Still, voters are increasingly skeptical about the longevity of oil and gas as an energy solution. While they are evenly split over whether oil and gas are a short-term or medium-term solution for fulfilling America's energy needs, a mere 10 percent think oil and gas are a long-term solution.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The Deloitte survey also identified the four most urgent issues facing the new presidential administration: the nation's economy, 84 percent; the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, 39 percent; health care, 26 percent; and energy, 19 percent (multiple responses were permitted; numbers do not add up to 100 percent).
The survey placed a special focus on the national energy situation, which voters believe is on the wrong track by a three-to-one margin -- 79 percent claiming that the nation's energy situation is in worse shape now than five years ago.
The survey shows that Americans have a particular passion for renewable energy, but may not realize the need for more hydrocarbons like oil and gas, which are projected to account for the majority of the world's transportation fuels through 2030. Given this fact, the new presidential administration could face a challenge meeting the public's short-term aspirations for renewable energy.
"It's clear from our survey that most voters believe renewable energy is the way of the future," said Gary Adams, vice chairman, oil and gas, Deloitte LLP. "While this is very important, many voters may not understand the current costs and complexities of developing renewable energy."
In the survey, renewables like solar power and wind power have an 86 percent favorability rating, consistent across all age and education groups. Moreover, a plurality of voters (41 percent) believe renewable energy is the cheapest type of energy today, with an additional 10 percentage points (51 percent overall) claiming renewable energy will be the cheapest energy source 25 years from now.
In contrast, the percentage of voters surveyed who believe oil and gas is currently the cheapest energy source trails renewables by 25 points (16 percent feel oil and gas is currently a cheap energy source). What is more, the percentage trails renewables by a full 45 points when voters look into the future (6 percent believe oil and gas will be a cheap energy source 25 years from now).
Adams points out that there is confusion among voters about the real costs of renewable energy sources. "Right now, renewables simply are not as cheap as fossil fuels, which adds to the challenge of satisfying the public's desire to move away from conventional oil and gas in a short time period."
When it comes to sustainability, oil and gas decline even further in voters' minds: 25 percent surveyed say oil and gas are a sustainable energy source today, but only 8 percent say the same will be true 25 years from now -- a 17 point drop.
Adams points out that America urgently needs a comprehensive energy policy that will promote investment in the development of economical alternative fuels, such as renewables and, at the same time, encourage local exploration and production of oil and gas to bridge to the gap to the future.
"The world will be primarily reliant on fossil fuels for at least two generations -- the bridge to tomorrow's new energy future depends on this. The key is to have a sensible plan to transition to a new, cleaner energy era. It is also clear that the oil and gas industry needs to do more to educate the public on the challenges ahead."
Deloitte's survey offers a few clues as to how voters would like go about this transition. First and foremost, voters widely agree on requiring more stringent and mandatory fuel economy standards for all cars sold in America. Most voters, especially younger ones, are also in favor of funding major clean energy projects despite high costs.
Surprisingly, the survey showed that oil and gas are viewed with less outright disdain than one might assume: Conventional oil and gas generally enjoy two-to-one support as an energy source among all voters surveyed, although the level of support is highest among those over the age of 55. At least one in three voters prefers using fossil fuels more efficiently rather than moving away from them. Older voters are also in favor of building new refineries to produce more gasoline.
Still, voters are increasingly skeptical about the longevity of oil and gas as an energy solution. While they are evenly split over whether oil and gas are a short-term or medium-term solution for fulfilling America's energy needs, a mere 10 percent think oil and gas are a long-term solution.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
New Green Energy Plans Would Create 120 Green Tons of Wood Demand
PRNewswire/ -- RISI today through its Wood Biomass Market Report, indicated that woodfiber will play a major role in any new green energy spending plans in the U.S. The Report stated that as of Dec. 12, estimates from the ever-expanding federal stimulus package suggest the green component (wood, wind, solar, etc.) will be a whopping $50 billion over two years. If 20% falls to wood energy, that near term spending of $10 billion would spur formidable growth, providing tens of thousands of new jobs -- and wood demand of perhaps 120 million green tons, long-term.
Compared to an estimated 215 green tons of consumption currently by the nation's pulp & paper industry, this new demand will be significant, and could create a $3 billion per year wood energy market at current prices. The Report also projects that a good bit of this expansion is already underway, with current projects topping 32 million tons. Wood-derived fuels already account for a full third of the nation's renewable energy, 50% if hydroelectricity were excluded. RISI projects that this increased demand will occur most in the U.S. South, followed by the U.S. West, and then the U.S. North.
Chris Lyddan, Contributing Editor of the Wood Biomass Market Report, comments, "How soon we might see this increase in demand take place ultimately rests heavily in the hands of President-elect Barack Obama and the next Congress." He continued, "Regardless of the actual timing, an ongoing RISI assessment of the plan reveals wholesale changes to forestry and traditional wood users are on the way. More than $13 billion in public and private investment capital was pumped into US clean energy industries in 2007, according to the Department of Energy. Interestingly, the newly proposed government incentives exclude the many billions of dollars of private sector funding required in new projects. As such, wood energy investments could dwarf failing paper and lumber operations in just the next several years, almost an imponderable outcome."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Compared to an estimated 215 green tons of consumption currently by the nation's pulp & paper industry, this new demand will be significant, and could create a $3 billion per year wood energy market at current prices. The Report also projects that a good bit of this expansion is already underway, with current projects topping 32 million tons. Wood-derived fuels already account for a full third of the nation's renewable energy, 50% if hydroelectricity were excluded. RISI projects that this increased demand will occur most in the U.S. South, followed by the U.S. West, and then the U.S. North.
Chris Lyddan, Contributing Editor of the Wood Biomass Market Report, comments, "How soon we might see this increase in demand take place ultimately rests heavily in the hands of President-elect Barack Obama and the next Congress." He continued, "Regardless of the actual timing, an ongoing RISI assessment of the plan reveals wholesale changes to forestry and traditional wood users are on the way. More than $13 billion in public and private investment capital was pumped into US clean energy industries in 2007, according to the Department of Energy. Interestingly, the newly proposed government incentives exclude the many billions of dollars of private sector funding required in new projects. As such, wood energy investments could dwarf failing paper and lumber operations in just the next several years, almost an imponderable outcome."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Shaw Chairman Urges National Commitment to Build Nuclear Power Plants
(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Shaw Group Inc. (NYSE:SGR) Chairman J.M. Bernhard Jr. called for a national commitment to build up to 50 nuclear power plants by 2030, telling a gathering of power industry leaders that the jobs, clean electricity and energy independence created by a “nuclear renaissance” offer a unique platform to achieve the “hope and change” pledged by President-elect Barack Obama.
“If this nation and the Obama administration are truly serious about controlling global warming, nuclear power must maintain its 20 percent share of U.S. power generation,” said Mr. Bernhard, Shaw’s chairman, president and chief executive officer, during a keynote address at last week’s Power-Gen International 2008 trade show in Orlando, Fla. “That will require the construction of 45 to 50 new nuclear plants by 2030, while also maintaining operation of the current fleet.”
Such a commitment, he said, would have the support of most Americans. “Almost 70 percent of Americans favor the construction of new nuclear plants,” Mr. Bernhard said. “That level of public opinion has never been higher.”
One reason a nuclear renaissance is vital, he explained, is that alternative forms of generation are years away from providing reliable, plentiful and affordable carbon-free electricity. While wind and solar are receiving a lot of attention as sources of clean energy, Shaw’s chairman cautioned that “we need to be honest” about their ability to meet U.S. electricity needs.
“Wind and solar will play a part, but they will not replace baseload sources of electric generation,” he said.
Given that reality, Mr. Bernhard said that nuclear must continue to play a significant role in meeting U.S. electricity demand that is projected to grow 1.1 percent annually through 2030.
Moreover, because of the limitations facing alternatives, Mr. Bernhard said that any serious effort to curb greenhouse-gas emissions must include a significant amount of carbon-free nuclear power.
Beyond its environmental benefits, Mr. Bernhard told the Power-Gen audience that a nuclear renaissance also would help drive the economic revitalization promised by President-elect Obama during the election campaign.
Mr. Bernhard said a nuclear renaissance “would create an industry-driven jobs program unrivaled since the great infrastructure projects of FDR’s Works Progress Administration. But unlike those Depression-era programs, the nuclear renaissance won’t be fueled with deficit financing by the federal government. Rather, it will be paid for with private capital and built by private citizens.”
Shaw's chairman cited a number of economic benefits that would be generated by a national commitment to build a new generation of nuclear power plants:
* Each nuclear construction project would directly employ approximately 4,000 craft workers.
* Once completed, a nuclear plant’s operation and maintenance would generate 400-700 permanent jobs paying an average of 36 percent more than local wages.
* The typical nuclear plant annually generates $430 million in sales of goods and services in the local community and $40 million in total labor income.
“The fact is that few initiatives can achieve the ‘hope and change’ promised by our incoming president like the nuclear renaissance: jobs for the middle class, economic growth, energy independence and a cleaner environment,” Mr. Bernhard said.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a “safe harbor” for certain forward-looking statements. The statements contained herein that are not historical facts (including without limitation statements to the effect that the Company or its management “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans” or other similar expressions) and statements related to revenues, earnings, backlog, or other financial information or results are forward-looking statements based on the Company’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on the Company. There can be no assurance that future developments affecting the Company will be those anticipated by the Company. These forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties (some of which are beyond our control) and assumptions and are subject to change based upon various factors. Should one or more of such risks or uncertainties materialize, or should any of our assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary in material respects from those projected in the forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. A description of some of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements can be found in the Company’s reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Form 10-K and Form 10-Q reports, and on the Company's Web site under the heading "Forward-Looking Statements.” These documents are also available from the Securities and Exchange Commission or from the Investor Relations department of Shaw. For more information on the Company and announcements it makes from time to time on a regional basis, visit our Web site at www.shawgrp.com.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
“If this nation and the Obama administration are truly serious about controlling global warming, nuclear power must maintain its 20 percent share of U.S. power generation,” said Mr. Bernhard, Shaw’s chairman, president and chief executive officer, during a keynote address at last week’s Power-Gen International 2008 trade show in Orlando, Fla. “That will require the construction of 45 to 50 new nuclear plants by 2030, while also maintaining operation of the current fleet.”
Such a commitment, he said, would have the support of most Americans. “Almost 70 percent of Americans favor the construction of new nuclear plants,” Mr. Bernhard said. “That level of public opinion has never been higher.”
One reason a nuclear renaissance is vital, he explained, is that alternative forms of generation are years away from providing reliable, plentiful and affordable carbon-free electricity. While wind and solar are receiving a lot of attention as sources of clean energy, Shaw’s chairman cautioned that “we need to be honest” about their ability to meet U.S. electricity needs.
“Wind and solar will play a part, but they will not replace baseload sources of electric generation,” he said.
Given that reality, Mr. Bernhard said that nuclear must continue to play a significant role in meeting U.S. electricity demand that is projected to grow 1.1 percent annually through 2030.
Moreover, because of the limitations facing alternatives, Mr. Bernhard said that any serious effort to curb greenhouse-gas emissions must include a significant amount of carbon-free nuclear power.
Beyond its environmental benefits, Mr. Bernhard told the Power-Gen audience that a nuclear renaissance also would help drive the economic revitalization promised by President-elect Obama during the election campaign.
Mr. Bernhard said a nuclear renaissance “would create an industry-driven jobs program unrivaled since the great infrastructure projects of FDR’s Works Progress Administration. But unlike those Depression-era programs, the nuclear renaissance won’t be fueled with deficit financing by the federal government. Rather, it will be paid for with private capital and built by private citizens.”
Shaw's chairman cited a number of economic benefits that would be generated by a national commitment to build a new generation of nuclear power plants:
* Each nuclear construction project would directly employ approximately 4,000 craft workers.
* Once completed, a nuclear plant’s operation and maintenance would generate 400-700 permanent jobs paying an average of 36 percent more than local wages.
* The typical nuclear plant annually generates $430 million in sales of goods and services in the local community and $40 million in total labor income.
“The fact is that few initiatives can achieve the ‘hope and change’ promised by our incoming president like the nuclear renaissance: jobs for the middle class, economic growth, energy independence and a cleaner environment,” Mr. Bernhard said.
The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a “safe harbor” for certain forward-looking statements. The statements contained herein that are not historical facts (including without limitation statements to the effect that the Company or its management “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “plans” or other similar expressions) and statements related to revenues, earnings, backlog, or other financial information or results are forward-looking statements based on the Company’s current expectations and beliefs concerning future developments and their potential effects on the Company. There can be no assurance that future developments affecting the Company will be those anticipated by the Company. These forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties (some of which are beyond our control) and assumptions and are subject to change based upon various factors. Should one or more of such risks or uncertainties materialize, or should any of our assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary in material respects from those projected in the forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. A description of some of the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements can be found in the Company’s reports and registration statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Form 10-K and Form 10-Q reports, and on the Company's Web site under the heading "Forward-Looking Statements.” These documents are also available from the Securities and Exchange Commission or from the Investor Relations department of Shaw. For more information on the Company and announcements it makes from time to time on a regional basis, visit our Web site at www.shawgrp.com.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Ventyx(R), EnerNex(R) and the Midwest ISO to Conduct Eastern Interconnection Wind Integration Study for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory
/PRNewswire/ -- Ventyx(R), EnerNex Corporation and the Midwest ISO announced December 8, 2008, that they have been selected to conduct a landmark study for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratory (www.nrel.gov) to help inform major policy decisions regarding transmission and generation planning, state and federal renewable energy targets and other facets of energy supply in the Eastern United States. This first-of-its-kind comprehensive regional assessment will evaluate the operational impacts on the power system associated with increasing wind capacity to 20 percent and 30 percent of retail electric energy sales in 2024 for the region.
The scope of the project is beyond that of anything previously attempted anywhere in the world. The Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study involves multiple interconnected areas ranging from the Dakotas to Oklahoma and eastward to Maine, and includes the Midwest Independent System Transmission System Operator (Midwest ISO), Southwest Power Pool, Tennessee Valley Authority, PJM Interconnection, New York Independent System Operator, ISO-New England and Mid-Continent Area Power Pool transmission market areas. These areas constitute the study region of the Joint Coordinating System Plan.
According to Dave Corbus, Senior Engineer at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, "This study will allow us to evaluate what 20 percent and 30 percent wind penetration in the Eastern electrical grid really looks like in terms of wind resource potential, future transmission requirements and the impacts on the electrical grid due to the variable nature of wind power."
"EnerNex and Ventyx are relying on the Midwest ISO to build upon prior integration studies, work performed by the Joint Coordinated System Planning Study currently in progress and related technical work to produce a complete analysis," said John Lawhorn, director, Regulatory & Economic Studies for the Midwest ISO, "in addition to the development of multiple transmission plans for the Eastern United States."
According to EnerNex Cofounder and Principal Consultant Bob Zavadil, "The team will leverage experience and methodologies established during the 2006 Minnesota statewide wind integration study and extend them to address the additional complexities and scope related to such a significant amount of wind generation in a large competitive market."
Leveraging the technical expertise of Ventyx consultants and the wind resource modeling of AWS Scientific, Midwest ISO will apply simulation models from Ventyx PowerBase(TM) & PROMOD IV(R) software in order to develop regional outputs for wind generation totaling more than 300 gigawatts of capacity. According to Ventyx VP of Energy Advisors Gary Moland, "By simulating the applicable region under a variety of operating and market conditions, MISO can quantify operating risks and impacts, such as highly volatile wind operation and the significant difficulties in day-ahead wind forecasting. We will also support MISO in analyzing and investigating model results and in developing a detailed forecast of market prices and system operation under the various study scenarios."
The study is scheduled for completion in July 2009.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
The scope of the project is beyond that of anything previously attempted anywhere in the world. The Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission Study involves multiple interconnected areas ranging from the Dakotas to Oklahoma and eastward to Maine, and includes the Midwest Independent System Transmission System Operator (Midwest ISO), Southwest Power Pool, Tennessee Valley Authority, PJM Interconnection, New York Independent System Operator, ISO-New England and Mid-Continent Area Power Pool transmission market areas. These areas constitute the study region of the Joint Coordinating System Plan.
According to Dave Corbus, Senior Engineer at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, "This study will allow us to evaluate what 20 percent and 30 percent wind penetration in the Eastern electrical grid really looks like in terms of wind resource potential, future transmission requirements and the impacts on the electrical grid due to the variable nature of wind power."
"EnerNex and Ventyx are relying on the Midwest ISO to build upon prior integration studies, work performed by the Joint Coordinated System Planning Study currently in progress and related technical work to produce a complete analysis," said John Lawhorn, director, Regulatory & Economic Studies for the Midwest ISO, "in addition to the development of multiple transmission plans for the Eastern United States."
According to EnerNex Cofounder and Principal Consultant Bob Zavadil, "The team will leverage experience and methodologies established during the 2006 Minnesota statewide wind integration study and extend them to address the additional complexities and scope related to such a significant amount of wind generation in a large competitive market."
Leveraging the technical expertise of Ventyx consultants and the wind resource modeling of AWS Scientific, Midwest ISO will apply simulation models from Ventyx PowerBase(TM) & PROMOD IV(R) software in order to develop regional outputs for wind generation totaling more than 300 gigawatts of capacity. According to Ventyx VP of Energy Advisors Gary Moland, "By simulating the applicable region under a variety of operating and market conditions, MISO can quantify operating risks and impacts, such as highly volatile wind operation and the significant difficulties in day-ahead wind forecasting. We will also support MISO in analyzing and investigating model results and in developing a detailed forecast of market prices and system operation under the various study scenarios."
The study is scheduled for completion in July 2009.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Community News You Can Use
Fayetteville, Peachtree City, Tyrone
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Monday, December 8, 2008
Obama Struggles to Explain Drop of Windfall Profits Tax for Oil and Gas Industry
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a statement from the American Small Business League:
Barack Obama may already be losing credibility over his explanation as to why he dropped the windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry from his administration's agenda. During his campaign, President-elect Obama promised to enact a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry, which would help finance a $1,000 emergency energy rebate for American families.
During the campaign, Obama repeated his commitment to enacting a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry hundreds of times. The Obama camp ran national television advertisements touting the windfall profits tax, and used the issue in campaign speeches right up to the election. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJPo5IGTd0A)
Now, any mention of the windfall profits tax has been quietly removed from the Obama-Biden transition website, www.change.gov, and an anonymous "transition team aide" acknowledged that the windfall profits tax had been dropped.
The Obama camp's explanation as to why the windfall profits tax has been dropped is inconsistent with the facts and the actual series of events.
The main excuse the Obama camp offered was that the price of oil had dropped below $80 per barrel, and as a result there was no need for a windfall profits tax. (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/dec2008/db2008124_176271. htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+%2B+analysis) There are several problems with their excuse.
According to OPEC, the price of oil dropped below $80 per barrel in early October, yet Obama continued to campaign on the promise of a windfall profits tax.
The windfall profits tax was the number one issue under "economy" on Obama's transition site, www.change.gov, when it was launched on November 6th and the price of oil was $54.89. It was removed without explanation on November 8th. The price of oil remained relatively stable during that three-day time frame and any miniscule change would not justify the sudden and unexplained elimination of one of Obama's cornerstone campaign promises.
The oil and gas industry has been making excessive profits for several years, even when the price of a barrel of oil was dramatically less than it is now. At the present moment gas prices have decreased, but with no windfall profits tax in place the oil companies are free to arbitrarily increase the price of gas at any point in time.
In 2003, when the average price of a barrel of oil was $30.06, big oil companies reaped record profits. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/crude2.html) According to an Associated Press (AP) article dated January 29, 2004, Exxon-Mobil earned $21.51 billion in profits during fiscal year (FY) 2003. At the time, the mark nearly doubled the company's profit during FY 2002. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60862-2004Jan29_2.html)
"It is difficult to believe President-elect Obama's explanation for dropping one of his most significant campaign promises when you look at the facts," American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman said.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Barack Obama may already be losing credibility over his explanation as to why he dropped the windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry from his administration's agenda. During his campaign, President-elect Obama promised to enact a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry, which would help finance a $1,000 emergency energy rebate for American families.
During the campaign, Obama repeated his commitment to enacting a windfall profits tax on the oil and gas industry hundreds of times. The Obama camp ran national television advertisements touting the windfall profits tax, and used the issue in campaign speeches right up to the election. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJPo5IGTd0A)
Now, any mention of the windfall profits tax has been quietly removed from the Obama-Biden transition website, www.change.gov, and an anonymous "transition team aide" acknowledged that the windfall profits tax had been dropped.
The Obama camp's explanation as to why the windfall profits tax has been dropped is inconsistent with the facts and the actual series of events.
The main excuse the Obama camp offered was that the price of oil had dropped below $80 per barrel, and as a result there was no need for a windfall profits tax. (http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/content/dec2008/db2008124_176271. htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+%2B+analysis) There are several problems with their excuse.
According to OPEC, the price of oil dropped below $80 per barrel in early October, yet Obama continued to campaign on the promise of a windfall profits tax.
The windfall profits tax was the number one issue under "economy" on Obama's transition site, www.change.gov, when it was launched on November 6th and the price of oil was $54.89. It was removed without explanation on November 8th. The price of oil remained relatively stable during that three-day time frame and any miniscule change would not justify the sudden and unexplained elimination of one of Obama's cornerstone campaign promises.
The oil and gas industry has been making excessive profits for several years, even when the price of a barrel of oil was dramatically less than it is now. At the present moment gas prices have decreased, but with no windfall profits tax in place the oil companies are free to arbitrarily increase the price of gas at any point in time.
In 2003, when the average price of a barrel of oil was $30.06, big oil companies reaped record profits. (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/crude2.html) According to an Associated Press (AP) article dated January 29, 2004, Exxon-Mobil earned $21.51 billion in profits during fiscal year (FY) 2003. At the time, the mark nearly doubled the company's profit during FY 2002. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A60862-2004Jan29_2.html)
"It is difficult to believe President-elect Obama's explanation for dropping one of his most significant campaign promises when you look at the facts," American Small Business League President Lloyd Chapman said.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Friday, December 5, 2008
UGA Researchers Looking to Turn Fruit into Fuel
Half of all the fruit grown in Georgia is never eaten by people or animals. It rots in the fields. A University of Georgia researcher says that spoiled fruit could fuel cars.
That wasted fruit can be converted into bioethanol through a fermentation process, said Elliot Altman, program coordinator for the UGA Center for Molecular Bioengineering.
“All fruits are 10 percent sugar, or potentially 5 percent ethanol,” said Altman, an engineer with the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. “It’s a real opportunity.”
The fermentation process could create a high-protein byproduct, which can be used in animal feed, called dried distillers grain. The largest opportunity in Georgia lies in watermelons and peaches. Last year, the state harvested one billion pounds of watermelon and more than 61 million pounds of peaches. The same amount rotted in the fields.
The fruit is left behind because it doesn’t make the grade for commercial sale. Consumers don’t want fruit that doesn’t look perfect, even though it is fine to eat in most cases. Some of the discarded fruit is used in preserves and juice, but 50 percent never leaves the field.
Ethanol conversion is not possible on a small scale like biodiesel operations. Getting enough commodity groups excited about converting the waste to fuel is one battle Altman hopes legislation may help with.
“One farmer isn’t big enough to set up operation,” he said. “If packers knew in advance the fruit would be used for something, they could gather it in a separate place for transport to the ethanol plant.”
Government regulations mandate the blending of 5 percent ethanol into gasoline by 2009 and 10 percent by 2011. The Renewable Fuel Standard program will increase the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into gasoline from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022.
But, ethanol plants aren’t cheap.
“You can’t build a small plant,” he said. “To be cost effective, most experts agree that a plant would need to produce at least 10 million gallons of ethanol a year.”
Altman and his colleague Mark Eiteman, a biological and agricultural engineering professor, are working on techniques to simplify the commercial ethanol plant, making it cheaper to produce ethanol and DDG.
For example, their group has researched adding expired table sugars to increase the ethanol yields that can be obtained. Access to waste fruit is not a year-round venture, he said.
“Even with a couple of fruits, a fruit-ethanol plant would only be operational for half a year, and the infrastructure for an ethanol plant is a significant investment,” Altman said.
Altman is currently researching several other products – like grain sorghum – that could be used when the fruit is not available.
“It has silo storage capability and is able to grow in areas of Georgia not suitable for anything else,” he said. “It does not take away from other crops and would not hurt the food market.”
Georgia also has potential to produce ethanol from bakery waste. “We have a unique niche in the Atlanta area with our bakeries.”
By April Sorrow
University of Georgia
April Sorrow is a news editor with the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
That wasted fruit can be converted into bioethanol through a fermentation process, said Elliot Altman, program coordinator for the UGA Center for Molecular Bioengineering.
“All fruits are 10 percent sugar, or potentially 5 percent ethanol,” said Altman, an engineer with the UGA College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. “It’s a real opportunity.”
The fermentation process could create a high-protein byproduct, which can be used in animal feed, called dried distillers grain. The largest opportunity in Georgia lies in watermelons and peaches. Last year, the state harvested one billion pounds of watermelon and more than 61 million pounds of peaches. The same amount rotted in the fields.
The fruit is left behind because it doesn’t make the grade for commercial sale. Consumers don’t want fruit that doesn’t look perfect, even though it is fine to eat in most cases. Some of the discarded fruit is used in preserves and juice, but 50 percent never leaves the field.
Ethanol conversion is not possible on a small scale like biodiesel operations. Getting enough commodity groups excited about converting the waste to fuel is one battle Altman hopes legislation may help with.
“One farmer isn’t big enough to set up operation,” he said. “If packers knew in advance the fruit would be used for something, they could gather it in a separate place for transport to the ethanol plant.”
Government regulations mandate the blending of 5 percent ethanol into gasoline by 2009 and 10 percent by 2011. The Renewable Fuel Standard program will increase the volume of renewable fuel required to be blended into gasoline from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons by 2022.
But, ethanol plants aren’t cheap.
“You can’t build a small plant,” he said. “To be cost effective, most experts agree that a plant would need to produce at least 10 million gallons of ethanol a year.”
Altman and his colleague Mark Eiteman, a biological and agricultural engineering professor, are working on techniques to simplify the commercial ethanol plant, making it cheaper to produce ethanol and DDG.
For example, their group has researched adding expired table sugars to increase the ethanol yields that can be obtained. Access to waste fruit is not a year-round venture, he said.
“Even with a couple of fruits, a fruit-ethanol plant would only be operational for half a year, and the infrastructure for an ethanol plant is a significant investment,” Altman said.
Altman is currently researching several other products – like grain sorghum – that could be used when the fruit is not available.
“It has silo storage capability and is able to grow in areas of Georgia not suitable for anything else,” he said. “It does not take away from other crops and would not hurt the food market.”
Georgia also has potential to produce ethanol from bakery waste. “We have a unique niche in the Atlanta area with our bakeries.”
By April Sorrow
University of Georgia
April Sorrow is a news editor with the University of Georgia College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences.
-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Plant Washington to Offer Reliable and Affordable Electricity to Citizens of Georgia
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Power4Georgians, a consortium of 10 Georgia EMCs that have partnered to develop a comprehensive strategy to meet demand for affordable and reliable energy in Georgia, today emphasized its position that coal is an essential cornerstone to fulfilling that strategy.
“While we are proponents of viable alternative energy projects such as wind, solar, biomass, etc., none of those options can come close to fulfilling large scale needs in the near future,” said Dean Alford, spokesman for Power4Georgians.
Some opponents of coal have spread misinformation indicating that to build and operate Plant Washington in a safe and environmentally responsible manner is not economically viable. There are many flaws in their argument; specifically they claim that the prices for materials used in construction are escalating rapidly, which is not true. Steel for instance has declined from its July price of $1,000 per ton to about $500 per ton today. Perhaps most significant are opponent claims that the cost of coal continues to rise when the reality is, coal has declined approximately 40% since July.
“It is ludicrous to believe that we would move forward with Plant Washington if we weren’t certain that it was economically viable,” said Dean Alford, spokesman for Power4Georgians. “I can assure you, nobody is more cognizant of cost than the co-ops involved in this project.”
To be built and operated near Sandersville in Washington County, Georgia, the plant will provide an enormous economic boost for the region and indeed the entire state. Capital investment is expected to be approximately $2.1 billion. For comparison sake, the much publicized Kia manufacturing plant in west-central Georgia represents an investment of $1.2 billion.
Plant Washington will create more than 1,400 jobs during the construction phase of the project and approximately 130 full time jobs when the plant is placed into operation. In addition, 300 support jobs in ancillary businesses will be created in the region when the plant opens.
“This is a perfect example of a project that will provide great benefit to the people of Georgia at a time when it is needed most,” Alford said.
With Georgia’s rapidly growing population - and even with Plant Washington contributing 850 Megawatts to the state’s power grid - consumption of electricity will outstrip supply within the next decade unless new generation facilities are built and placed into operation.
“Power4Georgians believes in an ‘all in’ strategy which means we fully support solar, wind, biomass, nuclear and coal generation facilities. Georgia needs every bit of electricity that can be generated if we are to assure that when the switch is flipped, the lights come on now and for years to come,” Alford concluded.
-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
“While we are proponents of viable alternative energy projects such as wind, solar, biomass, etc., none of those options can come close to fulfilling large scale needs in the near future,” said Dean Alford, spokesman for Power4Georgians.
Some opponents of coal have spread misinformation indicating that to build and operate Plant Washington in a safe and environmentally responsible manner is not economically viable. There are many flaws in their argument; specifically they claim that the prices for materials used in construction are escalating rapidly, which is not true. Steel for instance has declined from its July price of $1,000 per ton to about $500 per ton today. Perhaps most significant are opponent claims that the cost of coal continues to rise when the reality is, coal has declined approximately 40% since July.
“It is ludicrous to believe that we would move forward with Plant Washington if we weren’t certain that it was economically viable,” said Dean Alford, spokesman for Power4Georgians. “I can assure you, nobody is more cognizant of cost than the co-ops involved in this project.”
To be built and operated near Sandersville in Washington County, Georgia, the plant will provide an enormous economic boost for the region and indeed the entire state. Capital investment is expected to be approximately $2.1 billion. For comparison sake, the much publicized Kia manufacturing plant in west-central Georgia represents an investment of $1.2 billion.
Plant Washington will create more than 1,400 jobs during the construction phase of the project and approximately 130 full time jobs when the plant is placed into operation. In addition, 300 support jobs in ancillary businesses will be created in the region when the plant opens.
“This is a perfect example of a project that will provide great benefit to the people of Georgia at a time when it is needed most,” Alford said.
With Georgia’s rapidly growing population - and even with Plant Washington contributing 850 Megawatts to the state’s power grid - consumption of electricity will outstrip supply within the next decade unless new generation facilities are built and placed into operation.
“Power4Georgians believes in an ‘all in’ strategy which means we fully support solar, wind, biomass, nuclear and coal generation facilities. Georgia needs every bit of electricity that can be generated if we are to assure that when the switch is flipped, the lights come on now and for years to come,” Alford concluded.
-----
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
Thursday, December 4, 2008
New Ad Campaign Distorts the Reality of Clean Coal Technology
/PRNewswire/ -- (Statement by ACCCE Vice President for Communications Joe Lucas regarding a new advertising campaign sponsored by the RealityCoalition.org - a group comprised of the Alliance for Climate Protection, League of Conservation Voters, National Wildlife Federation, Natural Resources Defense Council and the Sierra Club)
"I'm surprised that a coalition of environmental special interest groups has placed ads doubting the existence of clean coal technologies.
"For over 40 years, private industry, academia, and the federal government have been working in partnership to bring new technologies to the marketplace that reduces the environmental footprint of using coal to generate electricity. Those who doubt the existence of clean coal technology need only to look at the 70% improvement in the environmental efficiency of America's coal-based electricity fleet measured by emissions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants regulated by federal and state clean air act laws per unit of energy produced. But this is only part of the story.
"In our America's Power campaign (americaspower.org) we have consistently talked about the need to invest in advanced clean coal technologies to ensure that we can capture and safely store CO2 emissions at coal-based power plants both here at home and around the world. While this remains a complex and challenging task, anyone who is skeptical about the progress that is being made on this front would only need to visit the U.S. Department of Energy's website (Clean Power Initiative) at http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/cleancoal/ to get a better appreciation and understanding of the industry's commitment to this cause.
"We join President-elect Barack Obama in calling for additional funding for advanced clean coal technologies to ensure that we meet the challenge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time enjoying the benefits of relying upon coal, our most abundant domestic energy resource, to meet future energy needs.
"I would have hoped that the environmental special interest groups that are sponsoring this new ad would support such an effort, but they have obviously chosen a different path."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
"I'm surprised that a coalition of environmental special interest groups has placed ads doubting the existence of clean coal technologies.
"For over 40 years, private industry, academia, and the federal government have been working in partnership to bring new technologies to the marketplace that reduces the environmental footprint of using coal to generate electricity. Those who doubt the existence of clean coal technology need only to look at the 70% improvement in the environmental efficiency of America's coal-based electricity fleet measured by emissions of criteria and hazardous air pollutants regulated by federal and state clean air act laws per unit of energy produced. But this is only part of the story.
"In our America's Power campaign (americaspower.org) we have consistently talked about the need to invest in advanced clean coal technologies to ensure that we can capture and safely store CO2 emissions at coal-based power plants both here at home and around the world. While this remains a complex and challenging task, anyone who is skeptical about the progress that is being made on this front would only need to visit the U.S. Department of Energy's website (Clean Power Initiative) at http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/powersystems/cleancoal/ to get a better appreciation and understanding of the industry's commitment to this cause.
"We join President-elect Barack Obama in calling for additional funding for advanced clean coal technologies to ensure that we meet the challenge of reducing greenhouse gas emissions while at the same time enjoying the benefits of relying upon coal, our most abundant domestic energy resource, to meet future energy needs.
"I would have hoped that the environmental special interest groups that are sponsoring this new ad would support such an effort, but they have obviously chosen a different path."
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
Here Comes the Sun! FPL’s Next Generation Solar Energy Center to Be World’s First Hybrid Solar Plant, First Utility-Scale Solar Facility in Florida
GEG Note: It appears our neighbors to the south are on the verge of something great. We thought our readers would find this story of interest as we all learn more about alternative energy sources.
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp and local community leaders joined officials of Florida Power & Light Company here today to break ground on FPL’s Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, which will be the world’s first hybrid solar energy plant and the first utility-scale solar facility in Florida.
With Florida and the nation facing the twin challenges of climate change and energy security, FPL’s new 75-megawatt Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center marks an important early step in Florida’s quest to use more sun to power the Sunshine State.
“Florida’s future growth and economic strength depends on how we address climate change, and we know we can reduce greenhouse gases by using fewer fossil fuels and more natural energy sources like solar,” said Gov. Charlie Crist. “This solar facility is a significant step in that direction.”
As the first hybrid solar facility in the world to combine a solar-thermal field with a combined-cycle natural gas power plant, the Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center will use less fossil fuel when heat from the sun is available to help produce the steam needed to generate electricity. This innovative technology will help protect customers from volatile fossil fuel costs as it reduces Florida’s carbon footprint. The solar facility will consist of approximately 180,000 mirrors over roughly 500 acres of land at the existing FPL Martin Plant location.
“The next generation of Floridians is counting on us to address the most pressing energy challenges of our time. With the Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, we will capture the power of the sun to fight climate change and provide the state with clean, affordable energy,” said FPL Group Chairman and CEO Lew Hay.
“At this innovative facility, each sunrise will be the equivalent of easing our foot off the gas pedal as solar power is being produced. With the continued support of Gov. Crist, the Florida Legislature and the Public Service Commission, FPL will do more – much more – in the coming years to build Florida’s renewable energy industry,” said Hay.
Gov. Crist has made clean energy and protecting Florida’s environment a priority since taking office.
"The Governor and I want to commend FPL for being a leader in the use of solar energy as the world’s No. 1 producer of solar thermal energy and one of the largest generators of wind power,” said Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp. “We believe there is no better place than here, in the Sunshine State, to lead the way in expanding solar technology to homes and businesses."
The Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center will provide enough power to serve about 11,000 homes. Over 30 years, the solar facility will prevent the emissions of more than 2.75 million tons of greenhouse gases, which is the equivalent of removing more than 18,700 cars from the road every year for the life of the project, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The implementation of solar thermal technology will also decrease fossil-fuel usage by approximately 41 billion cubic feet of natural gas and more than 600,000 barrels of oil.
The facility will be the nation’s second-largest solar energy facility when it is fully operational in 2010. The Martin facility is the largest of three solar projects FPL is building in Florida. With a combined total of 110 megawatts of emissions-free energy, the facilities will make Florida the No. 2 producer of solar energy nationwide and will avoid nearly 3.5 million tons of carbon dioxide over the lives of the plants.
In addition to the Martin facility, FPL will also build two other solar projects in Florida – one at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center and the other in Desoto County. These facilities will add 35 megawatts of solar photovoltaic capacity to the state. Combined, these projects help strengthen FPL Group’s position as the nation’s clean energy leader.
Among the company’s clean energy credentials:
* FPL Group is the nation’s No. 1 producer of renewable energy from wind. The company has 58 projects in 16 states with a capacity of more than 5,800 megawatts of electricity, or enough to power more than 1 million homes and businesses with zero carbon emissions.
* FPL Group is the nation’s No. 1 producer of renewable energy from solar. The company operates the largest solar-thermal plant in the world in California’s Mojave Desert, the 310-megawatt Solar Electric Generating System.
* Florida Power & Light Company is the nation’s No. 1 utility for energy conservation, according to U.S. Department of Energy data. FPL’s conservation programs have helped the company avoid the need to build 12 medium-sized power plants since 1980, more than any other utility.
More information about FPL’s next-generation solar energy centers is available at www.fpl.com/solar. For downloadable, high-resolution photos of solar thermal technology, please visit www.flickr.com/fplsolar.
Florida Power & Light Company is a subsidiary of FPL Group, Inc. (NYSE:FPL), nationally known as a high quality, efficient and customer-driven organization focused on energy-related products and services. With annual revenues of over $15 billion and a growing presence in 27 states, FPL Group is widely recognized as one of the country's premier power companies. Florida Power & Light Company serves 4.5 million customer accounts in Florida. FPL Energy, LLC, FPL Group's competitive energy subsidiary, is a leader in producing electricity from clean and renewable fuels. Additional information is available on the Internet at www.FPL.com, www.FPLGroup.com and www.FPLEnergy.com.
Cautionary Statements and Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results
In connection with the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (Reform Act), FPL Group and Florida Power & Light Company (Florida Power & Light) are hereby providing cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause FPL Group's or Florida Power & Light's actual results to differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements (as such term is defined in the Reform Act) made by or on behalf of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light in this press release, on their respective websites, in response to questions or otherwise. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance, climate change strategy or growth strategies (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as will likely result, are expected to, will continue, is anticipated, aim, believe, could, estimated, may, plan, potential, projection, target, outlook, predict, intend) are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking. Forward-looking statements involve estimates, assumptions and uncertainties. Accordingly, any such statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, the following important factors (in addition to any assumptions and other factors referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements) that could cause FPL Group's or Florida Power & Light's actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and FPL Group and Florida Power & Light undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances, including unanticipated events, after the date on which such statement is made. New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of such factors, nor can it assess the impact of each such factor on the business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.
The following are some important factors that could have a significant impact on FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's operations and financial results, and could cause FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements:
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to complex laws and regulations and to changes in laws and regulations as well as changing governmental policies and regulatory actions, including, but not limited to, initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the energy industry and environmental matters, including, but not limited to, matters related to the effects of climate change. Florida Power & Light holds franchise agreements with local municipalities and counties, and must renegotiate expiring agreements. These factors may have a negative impact on the business and results of operations of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
• The operation and maintenance of transmission, distribution and power generation facilities, including nuclear facilities, involve significant risks that could adversely affect the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
• The construction of, and capital improvements to, power generation facilities, including nuclear facilities, involve substantial risks. Should construction or capital improvement efforts be unsuccessful, the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light could be adversely affected.
• Adverse capital and credit market conditions may adversely affect FPL Group's and FPL's ability to meet liquidity needs, access capital and operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital. Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the financial markets can also adversely impact the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and FPL, as well as exert downward pressure on stock prices.
• FPL Group's and FPL's inability to maintain their current credit ratings may adversely affect FPL Group's and FPL's liquidity, limit the ability of FPL Group and FPL to grow their businesses, and would likely increase interest costs.
• FPL Group and FPL are subject to credit and performance risk from third parties under supply and service contracts.
• Customer growth and customer usage in Florida Power & Light’s service area affect FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's results of operations.
• Weather affects FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's results of operations, as can the impact of severe weather. Weather conditions directly influence the demand for electricity and natural gas, affect the price of energy commodities, and can affect the production of electricity at power generating facilities.
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to costs and other potentially adverse effects of legal and regulatory proceedings as well as regulatory compliance and changes in or additions to applicable tax laws, rates or policies, rates of inflation, accounting standards, securities laws and corporate governance requirements.
• Threats of terrorism and catastrophic events that could result from terrorism, cyber attacks, or individuals and/or groups attempting to disrupt FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's business may impact the operations of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light in unpredictable ways.
• The ability of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light to obtain insurance and the terms of any available insurance coverage could be adversely affected by national, state or local events and company-specific events.
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to employee workforce factors that could adversely affect the businesses and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
The risks described herein are not the only risks facing FPL Group and Florida Power & Light. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to FPL Group or Florida Power & Light, or that are currently deemed to be immaterial, also may materially adversely affect FPL Group’s or Florida Power & Light’s business, financial condition and/or future operating results.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
(BUSINESS WIRE)--Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp and local community leaders joined officials of Florida Power & Light Company here today to break ground on FPL’s Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, which will be the world’s first hybrid solar energy plant and the first utility-scale solar facility in Florida.
With Florida and the nation facing the twin challenges of climate change and energy security, FPL’s new 75-megawatt Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center marks an important early step in Florida’s quest to use more sun to power the Sunshine State.
“Florida’s future growth and economic strength depends on how we address climate change, and we know we can reduce greenhouse gases by using fewer fossil fuels and more natural energy sources like solar,” said Gov. Charlie Crist. “This solar facility is a significant step in that direction.”
As the first hybrid solar facility in the world to combine a solar-thermal field with a combined-cycle natural gas power plant, the Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center will use less fossil fuel when heat from the sun is available to help produce the steam needed to generate electricity. This innovative technology will help protect customers from volatile fossil fuel costs as it reduces Florida’s carbon footprint. The solar facility will consist of approximately 180,000 mirrors over roughly 500 acres of land at the existing FPL Martin Plant location.
“The next generation of Floridians is counting on us to address the most pressing energy challenges of our time. With the Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center, we will capture the power of the sun to fight climate change and provide the state with clean, affordable energy,” said FPL Group Chairman and CEO Lew Hay.
“At this innovative facility, each sunrise will be the equivalent of easing our foot off the gas pedal as solar power is being produced. With the continued support of Gov. Crist, the Florida Legislature and the Public Service Commission, FPL will do more – much more – in the coming years to build Florida’s renewable energy industry,” said Hay.
Gov. Crist has made clean energy and protecting Florida’s environment a priority since taking office.
"The Governor and I want to commend FPL for being a leader in the use of solar energy as the world’s No. 1 producer of solar thermal energy and one of the largest generators of wind power,” said Lt. Gov. Jeff Kottkamp. “We believe there is no better place than here, in the Sunshine State, to lead the way in expanding solar technology to homes and businesses."
The Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center will provide enough power to serve about 11,000 homes. Over 30 years, the solar facility will prevent the emissions of more than 2.75 million tons of greenhouse gases, which is the equivalent of removing more than 18,700 cars from the road every year for the life of the project, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The implementation of solar thermal technology will also decrease fossil-fuel usage by approximately 41 billion cubic feet of natural gas and more than 600,000 barrels of oil.
The facility will be the nation’s second-largest solar energy facility when it is fully operational in 2010. The Martin facility is the largest of three solar projects FPL is building in Florida. With a combined total of 110 megawatts of emissions-free energy, the facilities will make Florida the No. 2 producer of solar energy nationwide and will avoid nearly 3.5 million tons of carbon dioxide over the lives of the plants.
In addition to the Martin facility, FPL will also build two other solar projects in Florida – one at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center and the other in Desoto County. These facilities will add 35 megawatts of solar photovoltaic capacity to the state. Combined, these projects help strengthen FPL Group’s position as the nation’s clean energy leader.
Among the company’s clean energy credentials:
* FPL Group is the nation’s No. 1 producer of renewable energy from wind. The company has 58 projects in 16 states with a capacity of more than 5,800 megawatts of electricity, or enough to power more than 1 million homes and businesses with zero carbon emissions.
* FPL Group is the nation’s No. 1 producer of renewable energy from solar. The company operates the largest solar-thermal plant in the world in California’s Mojave Desert, the 310-megawatt Solar Electric Generating System.
* Florida Power & Light Company is the nation’s No. 1 utility for energy conservation, according to U.S. Department of Energy data. FPL’s conservation programs have helped the company avoid the need to build 12 medium-sized power plants since 1980, more than any other utility.
More information about FPL’s next-generation solar energy centers is available at www.fpl.com/solar. For downloadable, high-resolution photos of solar thermal technology, please visit www.flickr.com/fplsolar.
Florida Power & Light Company is a subsidiary of FPL Group, Inc. (NYSE:FPL), nationally known as a high quality, efficient and customer-driven organization focused on energy-related products and services. With annual revenues of over $15 billion and a growing presence in 27 states, FPL Group is widely recognized as one of the country's premier power companies. Florida Power & Light Company serves 4.5 million customer accounts in Florida. FPL Energy, LLC, FPL Group's competitive energy subsidiary, is a leader in producing electricity from clean and renewable fuels. Additional information is available on the Internet at www.FPL.com, www.FPLGroup.com and www.FPLEnergy.com.
Cautionary Statements and Risk Factors That May Affect Future Results
In connection with the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (Reform Act), FPL Group and Florida Power & Light Company (Florida Power & Light) are hereby providing cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause FPL Group's or Florida Power & Light's actual results to differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements (as such term is defined in the Reform Act) made by or on behalf of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light in this press release, on their respective websites, in response to questions or otherwise. Any statements that express, or involve discussions as to, expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance, climate change strategy or growth strategies (often, but not always, through the use of words or phrases such as will likely result, are expected to, will continue, is anticipated, aim, believe, could, estimated, may, plan, potential, projection, target, outlook, predict, intend) are not statements of historical facts and may be forward-looking. Forward-looking statements involve estimates, assumptions and uncertainties. Accordingly, any such statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to, and are accompanied by, the following important factors (in addition to any assumptions and other factors referred to specifically in connection with such forward-looking statements) that could cause FPL Group's or Florida Power & Light's actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made, and FPL Group and Florida Power & Light undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances, including unanticipated events, after the date on which such statement is made. New factors emerge from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of such factors, nor can it assess the impact of each such factor on the business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.
The following are some important factors that could have a significant impact on FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's operations and financial results, and could cause FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements:
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to complex laws and regulations and to changes in laws and regulations as well as changing governmental policies and regulatory actions, including, but not limited to, initiatives regarding deregulation and restructuring of the energy industry and environmental matters, including, but not limited to, matters related to the effects of climate change. Florida Power & Light holds franchise agreements with local municipalities and counties, and must renegotiate expiring agreements. These factors may have a negative impact on the business and results of operations of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
• The operation and maintenance of transmission, distribution and power generation facilities, including nuclear facilities, involve significant risks that could adversely affect the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
• The construction of, and capital improvements to, power generation facilities, including nuclear facilities, involve substantial risks. Should construction or capital improvement efforts be unsuccessful, the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light could be adversely affected.
• Adverse capital and credit market conditions may adversely affect FPL Group's and FPL's ability to meet liquidity needs, access capital and operate and grow their businesses, and the cost of capital. Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the financial markets can also adversely impact the results of operations and financial condition of FPL Group and FPL, as well as exert downward pressure on stock prices.
• FPL Group's and FPL's inability to maintain their current credit ratings may adversely affect FPL Group's and FPL's liquidity, limit the ability of FPL Group and FPL to grow their businesses, and would likely increase interest costs.
• FPL Group and FPL are subject to credit and performance risk from third parties under supply and service contracts.
• Customer growth and customer usage in Florida Power & Light’s service area affect FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's results of operations.
• Weather affects FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's results of operations, as can the impact of severe weather. Weather conditions directly influence the demand for electricity and natural gas, affect the price of energy commodities, and can affect the production of electricity at power generating facilities.
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to costs and other potentially adverse effects of legal and regulatory proceedings as well as regulatory compliance and changes in or additions to applicable tax laws, rates or policies, rates of inflation, accounting standards, securities laws and corporate governance requirements.
• Threats of terrorism and catastrophic events that could result from terrorism, cyber attacks, or individuals and/or groups attempting to disrupt FPL Group's and Florida Power & Light's business may impact the operations of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light in unpredictable ways.
• The ability of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light to obtain insurance and the terms of any available insurance coverage could be adversely affected by national, state or local events and company-specific events.
• FPL Group and Florida Power & Light are subject to employee workforce factors that could adversely affect the businesses and financial condition of FPL Group and Florida Power & Light.
The risks described herein are not the only risks facing FPL Group and Florida Power & Light. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to FPL Group or Florida Power & Light, or that are currently deemed to be immaterial, also may materially adversely affect FPL Group’s or Florida Power & Light’s business, financial condition and/or future operating results.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
National Policy Forum on Renewable Energy in America to be Webcast Live on Dec. 4
Energy experts will converge on Capitol Hill Thursday (Dec. 4) for the daylong Phase II Policy Forum on Renewable Energy in America to make policy recommendations for the incoming administration. The American Council on Renewable Energy and Verizon Communications will provide a free webcast of the event live throughout the day. Panel sessions will cover a wide range of energy policy initiatives including: policy for transportation fuels; policy for electric power; financing the renewable energy scale-up; and policy advice for the next president and Congress.
Thursday, Dec. 4, at 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern
The webcast will be available at no charge via
www.acorephaseii.com. Pre-event registration is
recommended by going to ACORE's Web site (upcoming events)
at www.acore.org .
Former Sen. Tom Daschle; best-selling author and New York
Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas L. Friedman; Iowa
Gov. Chet Culver; and James Woolsey, former Director of
Central Intelligence.
Phase II of the Renewable Energy in America National Policy
Forum was first held in 2002. The goal of the conference is
to convey the contribution of renewable energy to the
nation's energy needs by bringing together high-level
speakers to discuss the energy policy issues concerning the
national scale-up of renewable energy to a substantial
share of U.S. energy supply, energy efficiency, sustainable
development, the environment and related fields. More
information is available at www.acore.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Thursday, Dec. 4, at 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., Eastern
The webcast will be available at no charge via
www.acorephaseii.com. Pre-event registration is
recommended by going to ACORE's Web site (upcoming events)
at www.acore.org .
Former Sen. Tom Daschle; best-selling author and New York
Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas L. Friedman; Iowa
Gov. Chet Culver; and James Woolsey, former Director of
Central Intelligence.
Phase II of the Renewable Energy in America National Policy
Forum was first held in 2002. The goal of the conference is
to convey the contribution of renewable energy to the
nation's energy needs by bringing together high-level
speakers to discuss the energy policy issues concerning the
national scale-up of renewable energy to a substantial
share of U.S. energy supply, energy efficiency, sustainable
development, the environment and related fields. More
information is available at www.acore.org.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Monday, December 1, 2008
Energy Efficiency Helps Consumers 'Weather' Heating Bills at Time of Economic Strain for Many, Says Alliance to Save Energy
/PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Even though winter energy price projections have come down, consumers already facing a tough economic climate are likely to be paying more to heat their homes this winter than they spent a year or two ago, according to the Alliance to Save Energy. High home heating costs make energy efficiency as timely as ever, says the Alliance, which also highlights new federal income tax credits for homeowners who make energy efficiency home improvements in 2009.
-- Those who heat with natural gas will spend almost $900 this winter, an
increase of about 4 percent over last winter and 9 percent over winter
2006-7.
-- Consumers using home heating oil will spend almost $1,700 this winter
- a decrease of 13 percent compared to last winter but an increase of
17 percent from 2006-7.
-- Propane users will spend about $1,550 this winter, a decrease of 8
percent from last winter but 15 percent more than two years ago.
-- Consumers with electric heat will spend almost $950 this winter,
almost 10 percent more than last winter and 14 percent more than two
years ago.
"The average U.S. household will spend $2,300 on home energy this year - 7 percent more than last year and 12 percent more than in 2006 - with winter heating bills taking a large 'bite' out of household budgets going into next year," noted Alliance President Kateri Callahan. "At a time of financial stress and strain for many, simple yet effective energy-saving steps are the way to go - not only to save money, but also to make homes more comfortable and help protect the environment.
"New federal income tax credits for energy efficiency home upgrades made in 2009 can partially offset the up-front cost of new equipment such as highly efficient furnaces and heat pumps or ENERGY STAR windows," she continued. "All the details are on the Alliance consumer website at www.ase.org/taxcredits.
"Another consideration is that powering the average U.S. home produces more than twice the greenhouse gas pollution as the average car - 25,000 pounds of carbon dioxide annually compared with 12,000 pounds for a typical car," Callahan added. "So when you use energy efficiency to lower your home energy bills, you also are helping the planet."
The Alliance suggests the following winter home energy tips:
-- Smart Fix - Plug up leaks to the outside - Seal air leaks with
sealant, caulking, and weather stripping; and install appropriate
insulation for your climate to increase your comfort, make your home
quieter and cleaner, and reduce your heating (and summer cooling)
costs up to 20 percent. In 2009, these energy efficiency improvements
can also generate a federal income tax credit of up to $500 for 10
percent of the cost of the materials (but not installation).
-- Properly maintain your HVAC system. Just as a tune-up for your car
can improve your gas mileage, a yearly tune-up of your heating and
cooling system can improve efficiency and comfort. Consider a
semi-annual or yearly professional "tune-up" of the system to ensure
it is working efficiently. The federal government's ENERGY STAR
website can help you find a qualified individual
(www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=heat_cool.pr_contractors_10tips).
-- Keep furnace filters clean. Check your filter every month, especially
during heavy use months (winter and summer), and change it if it looks
dirty. At a minimum, change the filter every 3 months. A dirty filter
will slow down air flow and make the system work harder to keep you
warm or cool - wasting energy. A clean filter will also prevent dust
and dirt from building up in the system - leading to expensive
maintenance and/or early system failure.
-- Let a programmable thermostat "remember for you" to lower the heat
while your home is empty and/or overnight to reduce heating costs by
up to 10 percent - and allow you to come home to and wake up to a
toasty, comfortable house.
-- Consider installing ENERGY STAR qualified heating and cooling
equipment. If you have to replace your HVAC equipment, consider a
unit that has earned the ENERGY STAR. Installed correctly, these
high-efficiency units can save up to 20 percent on heating and cooling
costs. Certain highly efficient models qualify for a federal income
tax credit in 2009.
-- Seal your heating and cooling ducts. In a typical house, about 20
percent of the air that moves through the duct system is lost due to
leaks, holes, and poorly connected ducts. Sealing and insulating
ducts increases efficiency, lowers home energy bills, and can often
pay for itself in energy savings. Also, a well-designed and sealed
duct system may make it possible to downsize to a smaller, less costly
heating and cooling system that will provide better dehumidification.
Insulate ducts in unheated areas such as attics, crawlspaces, and
garages with duct insulation that carries an R-value of 6 or higher.
-- Insulate your hot water storage tank according to manufacturer's
directions (being careful not to cover the thermostat or the burner
compartment in an oil- or natural gas-powered tank) and the first six
feet of the hot and cold water pipes connected to the water heater,
too.
-- Open curtains and other window treatments on your west- and
south-facing windows during the day to allow sunlight to naturally
heat your home, and close them at night.
-- Go "window shopping" at www.efficientwindows.org to discover how
high-performance ENERGY STAR-labeled windows can cut heating and
cooling costs by as much as 30 percent while increasing indoor comfort
and lessening fading of home furnishings. ENERGY STAR windows, too,
are eligible for a federal tax credit in 2009 - 10 percent of the cost
(but not installation) up to $200.
-- Also look for the ENERGY STAR label, the symbol of energy efficiency,
when replacing or buying appliances, electronics, lighting and many
other product categories. See www.energystar.gov for details on all 50
types of products.
Many more winter tips are available on the Alliance to Save Energy's consumer website at www.ase.org/consumers and http://www.ase.org/content/article/detail/924.
The Alliance to Save Energy is a coalition of prominent business, government, environmental, and consumer leaders who promote the efficient and clean use of energy worldwide to benefit consumers, the environment, the economy, and national security.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
-- Those who heat with natural gas will spend almost $900 this winter, an
increase of about 4 percent over last winter and 9 percent over winter
2006-7.
-- Consumers using home heating oil will spend almost $1,700 this winter
- a decrease of 13 percent compared to last winter but an increase of
17 percent from 2006-7.
-- Propane users will spend about $1,550 this winter, a decrease of 8
percent from last winter but 15 percent more than two years ago.
-- Consumers with electric heat will spend almost $950 this winter,
almost 10 percent more than last winter and 14 percent more than two
years ago.
"The average U.S. household will spend $2,300 on home energy this year - 7 percent more than last year and 12 percent more than in 2006 - with winter heating bills taking a large 'bite' out of household budgets going into next year," noted Alliance President Kateri Callahan. "At a time of financial stress and strain for many, simple yet effective energy-saving steps are the way to go - not only to save money, but also to make homes more comfortable and help protect the environment.
"New federal income tax credits for energy efficiency home upgrades made in 2009 can partially offset the up-front cost of new equipment such as highly efficient furnaces and heat pumps or ENERGY STAR windows," she continued. "All the details are on the Alliance consumer website at www.ase.org/taxcredits.
"Another consideration is that powering the average U.S. home produces more than twice the greenhouse gas pollution as the average car - 25,000 pounds of carbon dioxide annually compared with 12,000 pounds for a typical car," Callahan added. "So when you use energy efficiency to lower your home energy bills, you also are helping the planet."
The Alliance suggests the following winter home energy tips:
-- Smart Fix - Plug up leaks to the outside - Seal air leaks with
sealant, caulking, and weather stripping; and install appropriate
insulation for your climate to increase your comfort, make your home
quieter and cleaner, and reduce your heating (and summer cooling)
costs up to 20 percent. In 2009, these energy efficiency improvements
can also generate a federal income tax credit of up to $500 for 10
percent of the cost of the materials (but not installation).
-- Properly maintain your HVAC system. Just as a tune-up for your car
can improve your gas mileage, a yearly tune-up of your heating and
cooling system can improve efficiency and comfort. Consider a
semi-annual or yearly professional "tune-up" of the system to ensure
it is working efficiently. The federal government's ENERGY STAR
website can help you find a qualified individual
(www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=heat_cool.pr_contractors_10tips).
-- Keep furnace filters clean. Check your filter every month, especially
during heavy use months (winter and summer), and change it if it looks
dirty. At a minimum, change the filter every 3 months. A dirty filter
will slow down air flow and make the system work harder to keep you
warm or cool - wasting energy. A clean filter will also prevent dust
and dirt from building up in the system - leading to expensive
maintenance and/or early system failure.
-- Let a programmable thermostat "remember for you" to lower the heat
while your home is empty and/or overnight to reduce heating costs by
up to 10 percent - and allow you to come home to and wake up to a
toasty, comfortable house.
-- Consider installing ENERGY STAR qualified heating and cooling
equipment. If you have to replace your HVAC equipment, consider a
unit that has earned the ENERGY STAR. Installed correctly, these
high-efficiency units can save up to 20 percent on heating and cooling
costs. Certain highly efficient models qualify for a federal income
tax credit in 2009.
-- Seal your heating and cooling ducts. In a typical house, about 20
percent of the air that moves through the duct system is lost due to
leaks, holes, and poorly connected ducts. Sealing and insulating
ducts increases efficiency, lowers home energy bills, and can often
pay for itself in energy savings. Also, a well-designed and sealed
duct system may make it possible to downsize to a smaller, less costly
heating and cooling system that will provide better dehumidification.
Insulate ducts in unheated areas such as attics, crawlspaces, and
garages with duct insulation that carries an R-value of 6 or higher.
-- Insulate your hot water storage tank according to manufacturer's
directions (being careful not to cover the thermostat or the burner
compartment in an oil- or natural gas-powered tank) and the first six
feet of the hot and cold water pipes connected to the water heater,
too.
-- Open curtains and other window treatments on your west- and
south-facing windows during the day to allow sunlight to naturally
heat your home, and close them at night.
-- Go "window shopping" at www.efficientwindows.org to discover how
high-performance ENERGY STAR-labeled windows can cut heating and
cooling costs by as much as 30 percent while increasing indoor comfort
and lessening fading of home furnishings. ENERGY STAR windows, too,
are eligible for a federal tax credit in 2009 - 10 percent of the cost
(but not installation) up to $200.
-- Also look for the ENERGY STAR label, the symbol of energy efficiency,
when replacing or buying appliances, electronics, lighting and many
other product categories. See www.energystar.gov for details on all 50
types of products.
Many more winter tips are available on the Alliance to Save Energy's consumer website at www.ase.org/consumers and http://www.ase.org/content/article/detail/924.
The Alliance to Save Energy is a coalition of prominent business, government, environmental, and consumer leaders who promote the efficient and clean use of energy worldwide to benefit consumers, the environment, the economy, and national security.
-----
www.fayettefrontpage.com
Fayette Front Page
www.georgiafrontpage.com
Georgia Front Page
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
