Yay reader correspondence! One of our faithfuls emailed us this awesome story about solar panels being installed on houses at North Carolina’s Lejeune Marine Corps base. The panels are provided by FLS Energy and are used to heat water - according to NPR’s article, Camp Lejeune “is quickly becoming the largest [community] in the continental U.S. to heat water with solar energy.”

FLS’ solar panel heating system works like a greenhouse, heating fluid inside the house and transferring that heat into a 40-gallon, 180-degree water tank. They seem to specialize in installing solar panels in places that use a lot of hot water which, as is the case with Camp Lejeune, isn’t directly paid for by residents. The idea here, or at least one of them, is to show how inexpensive renewable energy can be. And the locals are agreeable to it; Sgt. Kirk Paulsen’s quote about the panel installation being “a milestone in our history books for the Marine Corps, for the state of North Carolina and for the continental U.S.” is well taken, as is his sentiment that “we’re conserving it for our children’s children’s children.”

This isn’t the first time that the military has tried out renewable energy, and their R&D wizards can improve it further if given the opportunity/funding. Their endorsement of things like solar power would provide a solid example for the rest of us, too, especially those of us whose political leanings are traditionally hostile to green energy. Most importantly, as the reader who sent this in pointed out, it’s more proof that “the anti-renewable energy crowd isn’t living in complete reality…their ideas just haven’t kept up with the way tech has advanced, especially in areas like solar.” Semper Fi!

For those of you following the California governor’s race (or, god forbid, actually living in California), the two most prominent candidates are former eBay CEO Meg Whitman and longtime political gadfly/current CA attorney general/former CA governor Jerry Brown. Brown recently spoke at Microsoft’s Mountain View campus, where he laid out his clean energy plan. To wit, he wants to place solar panels along the banks of freeways, school roofs, and pretty much anywhere that’s flat and catches direct sunlight. He also wants a requirement that new homes and commercial buildings use “zero net energy,” and he supports state global warming law AB 32, which Whitman opposes. So far, Silicon Valley is siding with Brown.

There’s more to Brown’s plan, but the more important question is whether or not he’ll really go through with it. Brown is one of the most baffling politicians around, and he swerves from hippy-dippy liberal to fascist loon with equal dexterity. Granted, he’s not quite as bad as “California Uber Alles” made him out to be, but he’s built his career as a public servant on a foundation of unpredictability, so it’s hard to get too excited when he announces big plans like this. In any case, it’s good to see higher-profile candidates campaigning on an aggressive green platform - the less voters see green/clean energy as an irrelevant fringe issue, the better.

We talked about the Charm City Circulator, Baltimore’s new system of hybrid buses, back when it had just started up; now that it’s been running a while, we thought we’d check in and see whether or not the locals took to it.

As it turns out, they have. The C3 is free, first of all (not that bus fare in Baltimore is all that expensive), and it shadows popular MTA bus routes. It’s also a cleaner ride around town than MTA buses, and not always late to designated stops, either. And riders are generally pleased with the experience. “This is the best thing ever!” says someone on the C3 Facebook page, noting that “your wonderful bus delivers me from…my hotel to the hospital and allows me to spend my cab money on other Baltimore attractions.” Yelp.com also yielded happy riders, with one reviewer asking “what’s not to like?…10 minute headways means there’s always a bus coming.” People are responding well to the idea of a hybrid bus, too - Baltimore is a much greener city than is often assumed.

In fact, Baltimore Brew has suggested just limiting MTA service to express buses and transit hubs and letting C3 cover everything else because, so far, it’s a better system with more money and community support. And, as the article points out, Baltimore’s public transportation network is beyond redundant and it’s time to finally trim down their 3 or four badly-run options into one or two that actually work. That the C3 is at the top of this list already says a lot about the potential for greener transportation in general, despite how often naysayers try to shrug it off as a gimmick or a fad.

We must say, we’re proud of Baltimore for offering such a nice service - we’ve ridden the C3 a couple of times and really enjoyed the experience. Let’s hope the city government and the MTA are paying attention.

One of our esteemed readers made some very interesting points in a recent email - the latest in an ongoing dialogue we have about alt. energy and the various roadblocks our country keeps building in front of it. We’re reposting some of the more interesting tidbits here, with links for context.

“The administration is finally using the oil crisis to press for his clean energy program. The link there is obvious, and I only wish he had started to do so sooner. However, questions have been raised about how much the spill will hurt the President’s ability to achieve his agenda, even on energy, which is ironic because you’d think that, in a sane world, a crisis like this would actually HELP push an energy bill through Congress. People have started making comparisons to Carter and the Iran Hostage Crisis, which is a bit unnerving.”

He continues:

“Even without the lost political capital, NPR has an article that I think raises issues about whether or not the U.S. will be ready to accept investment in alternative energy under any circumstances. They note that even as the oil spill ruins Louisiana’s coastline and fishing industry, residents may not be willing to back limits on offshore drilling because oil is such an important part of the state’s economy. Which is why Louisiana’s Senators push to keep the cap on damages, even as oil seeps onto their state’s beaches. It reminds me of the argument that Kevin Phillips made in American Theocracy: Superpowers rise, in part, because of their ability to create and adapt to new and innovative sources of energy. However, over time, the people and institutions devoted to that source of energy become overly powerful and entrenched. As such, the super power’s ability to change to a new, “better” source of energy is inhibited, and they are overtaken by another, more flexible nation that is able to utilize that new technology.”

It’s a weird country we live in, folks. Seriously though, a lot of brilliant stuff was said here. If anyone else out there has anything to add, leave a comment or shoot an email to kiefda03 -at- gmail -dot- com.

In the aftermath of the Gulf oil spill, which is going to be impossible to clean up if it keeps going the way it’s going, the few genuinely progressive voices in Congress are speaking up about oil and our dependence on it and better places to allocate federal money. Smart Growth America, for example, is championing the Kerry/Lieberman climate bill because of its proposed investments in clean energy production, and specifically clean transportation. Kerry pimped the bill himself on Huffington Post and basically promised the sun and stars if it passed, but there’s still a lot of opposition to the bill from the usual suspects, namely oil puppets and the “nuclear or nothing” crowd that shits up every alt-energy discussion. Click on the Smart Growth America link above to tell your Senators not to neuter this bill, if you feel so inclined.

Bernie Sanders, the Vermont socialist who - unlike Obama - is an actual socialist, chimed in recently too, positing that the oil spill in the Gulf has exposed offshore drilling for the stupid, wasteful idea it really is. He also brings up how much gas money America could save “just by raising our fuel efficiency standards to 35.5 miles per gallon for cars and trucks,” and ends by proposing that all of our fortunes would be bettered “if we take bold action in energy efficiency, public transportation, advanced vehicle technologies, solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal [energy].” In other words, it would behoove us to actually move forward on initiatives like the Kerry/Lieberman bill (which could actually be a lot tougher on corporations than it is) and quit trying to appease doomsayer conservatives with no ideas of their own beyond more of the same.

The Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (UNICA) is sponsoring a 54 cent gasoline discount in DC this week, a gesture meant to symbolize the 54 cents/gallon imported ethanol tariff they want lifted. Brazil’s domestic flex-fuel market is so big that they want to expand it elsewhere, and America’s ongoing energy debate (and relative inactivity) makes us ripe for the picking. Of course, American ethanol organizations like Growth Energy are sternly opposed. According to their CEO, Tom Buis, “the only thing we should be importing from Brazil is their resolve to become energy independent.” Whether you agree or disagree, that’s a damn good quote.

Besides, American ethanol progress isn’t totally dead. Poet LLC has talked about their goal of producing 3.5 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol by 2022, a lofty number they plan to reach by using their 26 plants to make corn and cellulosic ethanol in a process they called co-location. They also want to license the technology to other ethanol plants and increase the variety of feedstocks they use. And Verenium Corp. just got $4.9 million from the Dept. of Energy to support current cellulosic ethanol projects at its demonstration-scale facility in Jennings, LA. Cellulosic ethanol, which the media has been writing obituaries for since we started this blog, is moving forward.

Man, that makes us feel good. We needed some good news to start this week off right. Hopefully there’s more coming.

As we all know, the government is parceling out money left and right for some long overdue infrastructural maintenance - roads (which we’ll get to in a minute), education, and energy efficiency are three higher-profile projects being tackled by the Obama administration.

Trouble is, all the energy efficiency targets are urban, and rural homeowners are afraid of getting lost in the dust. And whether they’re living off the land or just yuppies pretending to homestead, we can’t afford to ignore them. Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina realized this too, which is why they’re drumming up support for a bill to “finance energy efficiency upgrades on 1.6 million homes nationwide, including 225,000 in South Carolina.”

ECSC sees this as the next logical extension of the Rural Electrification program, and is trying to build on efforts made in other states, namely Virginia and Arkansas. Under those programs, “homes are audited to determine what improvements would be most cost-effective. Then a low-interest, no down-payment loan is structured with monthly payments on the customer’s power bill that come to no more than the savings achieved from the upgrades.” It’s a pretty sweet deal, especially when you weigh it against the usurious loaning practices of nearly every modern bank or credit company, but it hasn’t had many takers thus far. ECSC hopes to change that with better marketing, and it would be nice if some of the ideas we saw at the Solar Decathlon this summer caught on thanks to this program. SEEDpod Solar Housing in particular would be helpful, since it’s adaptable to whatever climate it’s built in.

Meanwhile, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood continues to impress us. He recently said on his blog that “people across America who value bicycling should have a voice when it comes to transportation planning. This is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized,” sentiments he’d already made clear during a speech to bicycling advocates. Naturally, car manufacturers and their Republican puppets are pissed; The Big Money’s Matt DeBord said that “we can talk all we want about light rail and urban mass-transit and even flying cars and jetpacks—when push comes to shove, we’re Americans and we drive.” We found his quote particularly funny; as if other civilized places didn’t have well-maintained public transit/national rail services. But hey, the American taxpayer is ENTITLED to shitty unsustainable infrastructure, even if he or she actually wants to change it.

LaHood, a suburban Republican, is definitely an interesting character: while it’s not surprising that a Republican would dig his heels in like this, since Democrats can’t be relied upon to stand up for themselves, but it’s seriously hurting our heads that an outspoken Republican is on the correct side of an argument for once, especially given LaHood’s record of kicking back money to campaign donors. Still, green advocacy needs his kind of stubbornness, and we’re glad he’s here to provide it. Maybe some actual progressives will take note of his attitude and try it themselves.

We are busy people over here at Corn Car, so forgive us for leaving the blog unattended - hopefully our readers had a green St. Patrick’s Day in the environmental sense of it. Since we’re still digging our way up through mountains of work, here’s some reading material to keep everyone occupied for a while.

China Drawing High-Tech Research From U.S. - Yes, the Chinese are literally taking our jerbs. Specifically, engineers seeking jobs in a high-tech economy; according to the article, “companies are concluding that their researchers need to be close to factories and consumers alike.” Of course, China’s green energy/tech growth is due as much to unfair protectionism on their part as it is to the huge investment they’ve made in those industries, but they’re still a competitor and now the traditional flow of workers from east to west is reversing course. And after a certain point, the West can’t bitch about China locking out foreign companies when a) we’ve been stacking the deck against the developing world for decades, and b) many of American’s policy-makers are too stupid to see the potential in green energy.

Meanwhile, High-Speed Rail Gains Traction in Spain - A lot of EU members are trying to reduce their carbon footprints, and high-speed rail is a good start; “emissions per passenger on a high-speed train are about one-fourth of those generated by flying or driving.” But more importantly, Spain’s new rail system is upscale, convenient, and comfortable. Passengers get comfy seats, good food, polite service, and the new rail system chops the travel time between Barcelona and Madrid from 6 hours to two and a half. It’s basically what airlines used to be like in the 50s before they got greedy.

Speaking of, the American airline industry is miffed that Obama is investing federal funding into trains. But, according to Transportation Sec. Ray LaHood, that’s just tough shit for them. “We’re going to get into the high-speed rail business,” he told the the Federal Aviation Administration’s annual forecasting conference, following that up with “people want alternatives…people are still going to fly, but we need alternatives. So get with the program.” His candor is more than welcome. Airlines have been providing steadily worse, often frustrating service to passengers over the years, then bitching at the government when they lose money. They don’t seem to be able to connect those dots, or else they don’t want to. Either way, the entitlement from that industry has been rewarded for too long, and it’s nice to see someone tell them to suck it up and quit whining. Of course, the question of why it will take us 30 years to install high-speed rail when parts of the EU already have it is a question no one’s answered yet, but feel free to leave a comment if you have any ideas.

Any more links? No? All right, back to work.

Happy March, everyone! Say goodbye to universally crappy February and hello to the month when Coca-Cola, pancakes, the rubber band, and the parachute were invented. None of those things directly relate to ethanol or green energy, granted, but the world would be in pretty sad shape without pancakes. Or rubber bands, quite frankly.

As it is, we’re living in weird times. The relationship between Democrats and Republicans has gotten more caustic and spiteful than ever, to the point where ANY legislation sent to Congress will run aground, energy legislation being no exception. But state governments, hoping to reverse a wheezing economy and ballooning unemployment, “are increasingly courting renewable energy companies with stringent new rules mandating that a share of their state’s electricity come from renewable sources.” Generally, these “renewable portfolio standards” require that utilities either produce or buy renewable energy. Specific percentages and timelines are left to the individual states: New York wants 24% green energy by 2013, while Michigan only wants 10% by 2015. Maine, ever the overachiever, has its sights set on 40% by 2017.

This move towards green energy is rooted in studies finding that “almost 300,000 clean energy jobs could be created nationwide by 2025.” It’s not quite the 800,000 jobs we lost a year ago, but it’s still an impressive figure from a field wide open for innovation and growth. The most common sources of green energy are wind and solar power, but everything from ethanol production (yay!) to dredging up geothermal energy to torching biomass is being considered. Even the clean coal people are still building castles in the air. It’s so wide open that CO Democrat Max Tyler and FL Republican Lee Constantine are pushing for almost the exact same green energy bill for their respective states - their mandates only differ by 10%.

Finally! We’ve been cheerleading the economic benefits of green energy production for what seems like ever, and so have a lot of other, more prominent bloggers and public figures and people with good sense. Hopefully Washington won’t let things get too desperate before acting on the states’ momentum.

All righty, back to ethanol! And just in time, too, because it’s becoming more and more apparent that the sun is rising on cellulosic ethanol production.

First of all, there are a lot of processing plants being built and put to use; “Several companies…announced in June at the International Fuel Ethanol Workshop and Expo…that they have already produced cellulosic ethanol from demonstration plants or will do so within the year,” and as if that wasn’t good enough news, “they are producing between 70 gallons and 85 gallons of biofuels.”

This rush of productivity mirrors the optimism found in a study released by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Sandia National Laboratory (and sponsored by General Motors, of all people), who “found that large volumes of cellulosic biofuels could be produced from already identified biomass sources and resources without displacing crop production.” The study also made a longterm projection that cellulosic biofuels could compete with oil by 2030, a speculation based on future oil prices and accelerated development of feedstocks.

We don’t think we need to explain how awesome this news is for ethanol supporters, especially in the face of the smug naysaying we’ve had to put up with over the years. The big question is, of course, how cellulosic biofuels will be introduced to the marketplace if predictions come true and widespread production happens by 2011, but as it becomes more apparent that there is room for them in said marketplace, the laws of supply and demand will take their course. Hell, this might be fodder for another one of our lists…