GLOBAL GREEN ENERGY (R)EVOLUTION VS. GLOBAL GOVERNMENT


Solar Power Growth Up 70% Worldwide | The Energy Collective

Solar Panels Going Vertical

Has the Solar Market Reached A Turning Point?

comments     Posted May 26, 2011 by Geoffrey Styles with 812 reads
6

Several trends appear to be converging to make 2011 a watershed year for solar power, though not quite along the lines that solar advocates have been telling us to expect. The long-awaited arrival of "grid parity", when the unsubsidized cost of power from solar panels finally becomes competitive with that of power from the grid, is still either imminent or elusively out of reach, depending on who you ask. In the meantime, solar power remains critically dependent on government incentives. Changes in subsidy levels in key countries and the rapid growth of solar manufacturing in Asia are setting the stage for a shift in the geographical focus of the industry, with important implications for national energy policies.

Last year most of the new solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity in the world was installed in Europe, accounting for roughly 4 out of every 5 Watts of global PV additions. That shouldn't have surprised anyone, because it fits a long-standing pattern. However, the European policies that made it possible for PV to compete, even in such un-sunny northern locations as Germany, have come under considerable pressure as governments have been forced to confront high debt levels and other priorities. Feed-in tariffs (FIT) that guaranteed above-market power prices for the life of a PV installation have been slashed across Europe, including in Germany, Italy and France, in a trend that has lately spread beyond Europe. This is beginning to translate into lower demand. The reason it hadn't already resulted in a big reduction in European PV installations is that the cost of PV was dropping rapidly, further justifying legislated cuts to generous FITs.

Here's where the narrative diverges from the storyline that advocates outside the solar industry have been touting for years. Although a substantial portion of those cost reductions is attributable to economies of scale and experience curve effects--manufacturers finding new ways to cut costs as output climbs--a large slice of the reduction in global PV prices has been due to increased competition from lower-cost producers entering the game. The largest PV manufacturers in the world are now mainly based in China, rather than Europe, and PV producers outside Asia have had to shift much of their manufacturing to lower-cost locations in response. So for the last couple of years we've seen a global PV market focused mainly on sales in Europe but increasingly dominated by export-driven manufacturing in Asia. That picture is now changing as domestic demand in Asia picks up, along with growing installations in the US.

China is rapidly becoming the key country for solar, from both a supply and demand perspective. In addition to hosting leading PV producers such as JA Solar, Suntech Power, Trina Solar and Yngli Green Energy, China's latest five-year plan increases the country's solar power target to 10,000 MW by 2015 and 50,000 MW by 2020. That compares to global solar capacity of around 37,000 MW at the end of 2010, nearly half of which is in Germany. Ramping up installations to meet its new goals, as ambitious as they are, is unlikely to turn China from a net solar exporter to a net importer, as happened earlier for oil. That's because China's PV manufacturers are still adding capacity at a rate that should allow them to satisfy domestic demand in China--where they face only modest competition from foreign firms--while remaining highly competitive elsewhere.

With these developments, policy makers in Europe and the US who have been as focused on the creation of national solar manufacturing industries as on the deployment of solar as an element of their broader renewable energy strategies must answer a crucial question: As the PV industry develops and matures, will it follow the path of wind turbine manufacturing, in which established US and EU firms have been able to remain globally competitive, similar to the aerospace industry, or is it likelier to emulate consumer electronics, for which manufacturing is now dominated by Asian producers? If it's the latter, then the whole system of solar incentives must be rethought.

In the meantime, the shift of the solar power center of gravity away from northern Europe should advance the prospects for grid parity, because low-cost solar power depends as much on high-quality solar resources as on cheap PV panels. Geography isn't always destiny, but in the case of solar power its full potential will only be achieved when its deployment aligns large power demand with high average annual solar irradiance. In the long run, that points to a global PV market focused squarely on the US and China.
Photo by dan.


About Geoffrey StylesGeoffrey Styles is Managing Director of GSW Strategy Group, LLC, an energy and environmental strategy consulting firm. Since 2002 he has served as a consultant and advisor, helping organizations and executives address systems-level challenges. His industry experience includes 22 years at Texaco Inc., culminating in a senior position on Texaco's leadership team for strategy development, focused on the global refining, marketing, transportation and alternative energy businesses, and global issues such as climate change. Previously he held senior positions in alliance management, planning, supply & distribution, and risk management. He also served on NASA's Senior Management Oversight Committee for Space Solar Power. He earned an M.B.A from the University of California, Berkeley and a B.S. in Chemical Engineering from U.C. Davis. His "Energy Outlook" blog has been quoted frequently by the Wall Street Journal and was named one of the "Top 50 Eco Blogs" by the Times of London in 2008.
This is the official SEPA sight:

(vid) Eco-Question: When will solar power become mainstream? Current Green

Bringing down the cost of solar power means building on a grand scale.


(vid) Ralph Nader : An Unreasonable Man


Ralph Nader took on General Motors over safety issues early in his career. We are all safer because of his efforts and concern. Before you start the video, here are two of my fvorite quotes from him:

"If we started talking about civic globalization instead of corporate globalization,
the world would move forward." "We don't have a government of, by, and for the people, we have a government of the Exxons, by the General Motors for the DuPonts."



Movie (1996) Who Killed The Electric Car?



General Motors killed their electric car.
We COULD HAVE had electric cars for the past 17 years.

The auto industry has lied to us about the need for hybrids so that the oil industry can continue to make money and pollute our earth.

Electric cars are just now coming back to market, but it took independent auto makers to do it. The
big auto makers around the world are still a year or two away from catching up.

We as citizens and inhabitants of our earth have a duty to force oil, coal, and gas consumption into the history books and embrace a green future now. Not in a few years, Now.




"White House Joins Fight Against Electric Cars"

 

More proof that american politicians are in bed with the fossil fuel industries, and they really don't care about us, or the earth. ~ bad gas good wind

Read on.....


WASHINGTON, Oct. 9— The Bush administration went to court today to support the automobile industry's effort to eliminate requirements in California that auto manufacturers sell electric cars.
President Bush's chief of staff, Andrew H. Card Jr., was the chief lobbyist for General Motors, one of the plaintiffs in the case. Mr. Card was also head of an auto industry trade association when California proposed to require electric vehicles, and has publicly opposed such a requirement.
Under California clean air rules, 10 percent of the vehicles sold in the 2003 to 2008 model years must be electric or ''zero-emission vehicles.'' But the state, recognizing that the car companies were not ready to meet that goal, offered to let them sell hybrid vehicles, which run on gasoline and electricity, to satisfy part of the requirement.
Still, the industry wants to avoid having quotas at all and was not satisfied with that relaxation of the rules. It sued the state, arguing that the hybrid provision violated federal law.
Katherine Kennedy, a lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council, which supports the California rule, said that California ''attempted to make things more flexible for the car manufacturers, and cheaper, and this lawsuit is what they got as thanks.''
In a brief filed today with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in San Francisco, the Bush administration endorsed the industry's argument that this substitution was improper because it would, in effect, regulate fuel economy standards, over which the federal government holds exclusive jurisdiction. The car companies would get credit toward the electric-vehicle quota depending on the fuel economy of the hybrids.
The brief does not appear to raise any new substantive arguments, but it carries some political significance in that it appears to favor Detroit over Los Angeles. Mr. Bush lost Michigan in 2000 to Vice President Al Gore, and while Mr. Bush was defeated in California as well, the vote was far closer in Michigan. Mr. Bush has been reaching out to union voters and is hoping to capture the state in 2004 while the likelihood of California voting for him appears more remote.
''The major issue isn't the substance of the brief but the fact of the brief,'' said Daniel Becker, director of the global warming and energy program for the Sierra Club. ''The fact that the Bush administration, with the former chief lobbyist of G.M. as a chief of staff, is weighing in on the side of G.M. to overturn California's efforts to clean the air that Californians breathe is outrageous.''
Scott McLellan, a spokesman for the White House, dismissed the accusation that the administration was siding with General Motors because of Mr. Card's past connection.
''Congress long ago made clear there should be a uniform fuel economy standard,'' Mr. McLellan said. ''The American people would be best served if the leadership of special interest groups worked with us in our efforts to increase fuel efficiency, promote safety and improve air quality.''
Congress has long allowed California to set its own emission standards because smog there is so bad. As a result, the state has set emission requirements that have forced car companies to invent new technologies for pollution control.
Since 1990, California has been trying to incubate an electric car industry, putting it on the leading edge of battle between clean-air advocates and the automakers. What California does, states in the Northeast tend to adopt as well, another reason the car companies are trying to block the electric car, which they say is impractical in California and even worse in cold climates.
Environmentalists said that the auto industry initiated contact with the Bush administration to file the brief on the industry's behalf. Jon S. Coifman, a spokesman for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said, ''It's our understanding that this whole thing is expressly at the behest of auto industry plaintiffs.''
The administration brief acknowledges that the hybrid option is one of several ways that the car companies could meet the requirements. But it noted that a lower court found that ''these other alternatives are in fact impractical, and that manufacturers seeking to minimize their costs will be forced to produce hybrid vehicles that meet the state's fuel efficiency standard.''
It also said that the state cannot list compliance options in matters -- like fuel economy -- where only the federal government is allowed to regulate.
In a statement tonight, Gov. Gray Davis said: ''Fuel cell and hybrid technology is a decade ahead of where it would have been in the absence of zero-emission vehicle regulations. I am disappointed that the federal government would intervene with our efforts to protect our air quality.''

3 Types of Photo Voltaic Solar Panels Explained - Polycrystaline, Monocrystaline and Amorphous (Thin Film)

Thin Film (Amorphous PV) is larger than poly and mono crystaline so it takes more space for the same wattage. Amorphous panels work when covered with a dusting of snow. They will also work in partial shade unilke crystaline where shade will break the circuit. Of course the best installation is without any shading.

Thin Film PV is flexible and can be rolled out and glued on surfaces without puncture holes on a roof that need to be sealed that are associated with traditional PV mounting brackets. Amorphous, Thin Film PV is currently the most expensive of the three today.

Mono Crystaline PV panels work better than polycrystaline in cooler temeratures as it loses productivity in the noon heat of a very hot climate. These panels are more expensive and more efficient than polycrystaline.

Poly Crystaline PV panels are newer and cheaper than monocrystaline and less fragile.

All PV panels last 20 to 30 years and perhaps as many as 50 years.





BOSCH GLOBAL How Crystaline PVCells are made.
Electricity made from sand (silicon) and sun.




Organic Thin Film Photo Voltaic manufactured on a commercial sized label maker.
Massachusetts boasts MIT, U-Mass and Cambridge brain power and over 500 Green Energy companies including wind, solar, and flywheel within the State representing employment for 14,000 people and $250 million dollars in venture capitol.
This video also points out that utility grids who supply power with fossil fuels sources (coal and natural gas) politically block the developement of Green Energy because everyone who uses Green Energy represents a cut in their profits.




10 KW = 10,000 Watts, enough for six 1,500 watt appliances
or 176 (60 watt) light bulbs on this average sized flat roof.




Amorphous PV can be rolled out and glued onto existing metal roofing.

NEWS FLASH - Cherry Point Refinery On Fire - Washington State


Feb 17, 2012
20 minutes ago

British Petroleum's Cherry Point Refinery in Washington State
Jet Fuel storage area just burst into flames.

Oil Well Blow Out In Alaska Yesterday Still Out Of Control

Natural Gas surge causes Oil Well blow-out

in Alaska Yesterday.

The same type of event that caused the

BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster and spill.


No one has been injured (YET)

but the well has not yet been capped

and is still out of control.

Drilling mud spills at Repsol exploratory well





Posted on February 15, 2012 at 11:01 PM
Updated today at 11:02 PM



ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — No workers were injured or oil spilled when an exploratory well being drilled by a new company to Alaska's North Slope had an apparent blow-out.
An exploratory well near the mouth of the Colville River hit a natural gas patch Wednesday morning, forcing drilling mud back up the rig.
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation spokesman Ty Keltner says about 42,000 gallons of drilling mud were released on the gravel pad and snow-covered tundra.
Keltner says additional mud was pumped into the borehole in an effort to "kill" the well, but that mud was also blown out.
An unknown amount of gas was released as well. It was vented through a diverter.
By Wednesday evening, Keltner said the Spanish oil company Repsol reported that the flow of gas appeared to have nearly stopped and drilling mud was no longer flowing from the well.
Repsol has hired a Texas company to assist with controlling the well about 625 miles north of Anchorage. That crew is expected to arrive Thursday

Report: German grid could handle a million EV's by 2020


Report: German grid could handle

Several Grid Ready Technologies Replace Batteries for Wind & PV Solar Available Today

The U.S. has a few Utility Scale Photo Voltaic Power Plants, one Molten Solar Utiltity Scale Power Plant under construction, and several Utility Scale Wind farms in California, Washington, Wyoming and elsewhere, the largest being the State of Texas which as a State, is the world's 4th largest wind power producer in the world behind Germany, Spain, and India.

The U.S. also has a few urban and residential PV Solar systems and there is an array of wind turbines of varying sizes and designs for rural, urban and residential applications.

There are several other Grid Ready Electricity Storage System Technologies available today such as Advanced Flywheel Technology, Gravity Power Hydraulic Modules, and MAPS Mag Lev Power Storage.

Unfortunately while america would rather subsidize fossil fuels and war where fossil fuels are available, and insist on using highly polluting coal, and engage in risky Natural Gas Fracking while allowing Beacon Energy, an Advanced Flywheel developer to be absorbed by Rockland Capitol a corporation who's portfolio is 100% fossil fuels including BP as their primary supplier and also blamed China for the failure of Solyndra when in fact the true cause of Solyndra's failure is because the U.S. doesn't subsidize Green Energy while China, Germany, India, and Australia do.

Spain already has one of the worlds largest PV Solar Power Plants and the world's first operating Molten Salt Solar Power Plant, Germany has planned to be 100% Green Energy in the near future, Australia has PV Solar and is building it's first Molten Salt Solar Power Plant with plans to be 100% Green Energy including national transportation with 12 Molten Salt Solar Districts, China is building PV Solar and Wind Turbines for doestic use and export.


A Global green Energy Economy Is a 99% (R)Evolution.
We must Occcupy Together & Kick The Fossil Fuel Habit.


Here are some youtube videos of Grid Ready Electricity Storage Technologies as an alternative to batteries:









































Beacon Energy / Rockland : Fossil Fuel Execs Stop Developement Of Electricity Storage Device

Beacon Energy along with Clear Edge is an example of the fossil fuel industry burying alternative energy and preventing its use. Beacon was bought by xxx and decomissioned amidst "promises of re-organizing." Rockland's  portfolio is nearly all oil, gas, and coal.

It might be a free market but what they did is immoral and a crime against humanity. This is not what a free market was meant to be.


Rockland deleted videos that I was sharing of this magnificent electricity storage and load leveling device why? They cited copy right laws but the truth is that a company vested in fossil fuels does not want you to know about alternative energy systems.

Clear Edge Is actually more fossil fuel in a pretty new package owned by guess who , soldier, politician and fossil fuel man Mr. General Colin Powell.

Beacon Energy / Rockland Capitol
 

Fuel-Cell Startup ClearEdge Scores $73.5 Million From Investors




ClearEdge Power, a Hillsboro, Ore., startup that makes small-scale fuel cells, has scored $73.5 million in one of the bigger green tech funding rounds of the year.
The cash from Artis Capital Management, Güssing Renewable Energy, Sempra Energy’s Southern California Gas Company and Kohlberg Ventures is another sign that investors think fuel-cell technology is finally ready for prime time.
Fuel cells generate power and heat by converting hydrogen, natural gas or biofuels into electricity through an electrochemical process while minimizing the emission of pollutants associated with global warming and health problems.


Long held out as a way to produce cheap and green energy, fuel cells have only recently gained traction. Last year, Bloom Energy, a Silicon Valley startup that has raised more than $400 million in venture funding from top-tier investors, unveiled its 100-kilowatt Bloom Energy Server. The company has sold more than 100 Bloom boxes at $700,000 to $800,000 a pop to major corporations like Adobe, eBay, Google and Wal-Mart.
If Bloom’s stylish polished metal cubes, which look like something Steve Jobs would have designed, are the iPhones of fuel cells, ClearEdge’s 5-kilowatt, equally stylish white boxes are the iPod nanos.
While the Bloom box and fuel cells sold by companies such as UTC Power are made for industrial and large-scale use, ClearEdge is targeting small and medium-sized businesses and even homeowners.
“You can snap these things together like Lego’s,” Russell Ford, ClearEdge’s chief executive, said in an interview about the company’s refrigerator-size fuel cells. “We’re going after commercial office buildings, government office buildings, data rooms, schools and universities as wells as small hotels and restaurants.”
A ClearEdge spokesman said commercial customers account for about 60% of the company’s sales.
Comments:

Colin Powell’s Involvement with Bloom is just another example (Such as Condaleezza Rice’s involvement ith Chevron) of politicians and politics being involved in the Fossil Fuels Industries.

Natural Gas Fuel Cells are still the status quo and the wrong road to invest in. Like the Keystone Pipeline, it is an Anti-Green Power Technology decision. All fossils still pollute when burned, and they all poison the environment simply upon extraction from the earth. Coal, Oil, and Natural Gas are a false economy with the pollution factored in. Bio-Fuels are a gross missapropriation of agricultural land which is needed to ensure our food supply well into the future, and oil is worth more (and will last much longer) if used exclusively as a manufacturing ingredient and not as a fuel.

A true Green Energy Future is a world wide: Industrial, Economic, Political, and Social (R)Evolution. We should be deploying wind and solar power along every freeway interstate, in every parking lot, on everylamp-post and building that already exists. The safest way to ensure the National Security of our agruculture system is with Electric farming Equipment. Now those are some smart things we can invest in.

Beacon Power : Electricity Storage & Load Leveling Without Batteries

Beacon Power designs and develops advanced products and services to support stable, reliable and efficient electricity grid operation.

High-energy flywheel-based solutions for clean, responsive, and reliable performance in multiple electric power applications.



Beacon Power to Celebrate Completion of World's First 20 MW Flywheel Plant
May 13, 2011

http://www.beaconpower.com/

Beacon's flywheel energy storage technology was named by Popular Mechanics magazine as one of the "10 Top Tech Trends of 2011"


Flywheels a "Top 10 Tech Trend for 2011"

© 2011, Beacon Power CorporationPrivacyLegalSitemap
65 Middlesex Road, Tyngsboro, MA 01879 | Phone (978) 694-9121 | Fax (978) 694-9127

http://www.beaconpower.com/



Beacon Energy / Rockland Capitol

Beacon Power : State Of The Art Flywheel Electicity Storage and Load Leveling. (Click anywhere to go directly to the Beacon Power Web Page)


Beacon Power

Skip to content
 Who We Are

Beacon Power designs and develops advanced products and services to support stable, reliable and efficient electricity grid operation.

What We Do

Energy Storage Systems
High-energy flywheel-based solutions for clean, responsive, and reliable performance in multiple electric power applications.

Upcoming Events

June 13-16, 2011
TechConnect World
Boston, MA
June 16, 2011
14th Annual Congressional Renewable Energy Expo
Cannon House Office Building
Washington, DC
Read More

Beacon in the News

June 12, 2011
Clean Technica
Largest Flywheel Energy Storage System Almost Up in Stephentown, NY
June 5, 2011
Nashua Telegraph
NY Electric Plant Nearly Grid-ready
Read More

Reports and Papers

Performance of First 20 MW Commercial Flywheel Frequency Regulation Plant
Electricity Storage Association - 2011 Annual Meeting
(June 2011)
Poster: Development of a 100 kWh/100 kW Flywheel Energy Storage Module
U.S. DOE Energy Storage Systems Project Update Conference
(November 2010)
Read More

Spotlight


Our 20 MW flywheel energy storage plant is now
running live on the NY grid and earning revenue.
Photo Gallery - Updated April 2011




Frequency Regulation Basics

These short animated videos explain how flywheel technology can address the growing market for frequency regulation on the grid.


Flywheels a "Top 10
Tech Trend for 2011"

Corrupt John Boehner Invested In Oil Companies Then Pushed Keystone XL


Corrupt John Boehner Invested In Oil Companies Then Pushed Keystone XL

January 22, 2012
By

When Americans vote for congressional representatives, they assume their interests are well-represented and take precedence over special interest groups and lobbyists. The potential for legislators’ conflict of interest and vote-selling will never disappear until corporate campaign contributions are brought under control and it reminds concerned citizens why campaign finance reforms are desperately needed to restore a semblance of democracy to government. America’s political system is polluted by the enormous amount of corporate and special interest money paid to legislators for their favorable votes, and the Citizens United decision has magnified the problem exponentially. However, the recent Keystone XL pipeline controversy exposed House speaker John Boehner’s related problem of actively promoting an agenda that benefits him financially apart from selling his votes to special interests.
Boehner has a history of selling votes on the floor of the House to financially benefit corporations, so it is not shocking that he has a conflict of interest in executing his job as a legislator and especially Speaker of the House. Revelations this past week from his financial disclosure forms that John Boehner invested $10,000 to $50,000 each in seven firms that had a stake in Canada’s oil sands should raise red flags for the House Oversight Committee; especially in light of Boehner’s push to grant a permit for the Keystone XL pipeline ahead of the State Department and EPA studies and reports and the millions big oil spent to hasten its construction. To make matters worse, after President Obama denied TransCanada’s permit to build the pipeline, Boehner’s spokesman lied about the number of jobs the President killed. One thing is certain; Boehner would profit from the Keystone pipeline. Profiting politically by selling votes and influence is a career-long habit of Speaker Boehner
In June 1995, Boehner handed out checks from the political action committee of tobacco company Brown & Williamson Corp. to fellow Republicans on the floor of the House. The payments to “about half-a-dozen” Republican legislators prior to a vote on discontinuing subsidies to the cigarette industry were rewarded when Republicans killed the bill. Boehner’s excuse for using the House chamber to pay legislators for favorable votes was that it was common and that the tobacco company told him to do it; so “I complied.” Boehner went on to demand spending cuts that explain his penchant for hypocrisy. Not much has changed. Republicans killed efforts to eliminate oil industry subsidies in the past year and not surprisingly, they are the largest recipients of oil industry campaign contributions.
It is not illegal to accept contributions from the oil industry, and indeed, Democrats receive about one-third as much oil money as Republicans, but besides taking less cash, there is a stark difference. Republicans take approximately three times as much from big oil because they vote in favor of the oil industry 100% of the time. Last May, the GOP blocked a bill to repeal subsidies for the five most profitable oil companies at the same time they floated the idea of eliminating Medicare and recommended eliminating mortgage interest deductions for working Americans. The forty-eight senators who voted with the oil industry received more than $21 million in career oil contributions. Each senator who opposed eliminating the oil subsidies received an average of 5 times as much cash as those who voted to eliminate the free taxpayer dollars flowing to the oil industry. This is an important point. Taking campaign contributions and voting for the donor’s interest 100% of the time is selling votes.
John Boehner’s investments in Canada’s tar sand oil companies and lying to the American people about the fallacious number of jobs the Keystone pipeline would create should be a criminal case of conflict of interest. Of course there is no law against Boehner’s unethical activities, but he should be investigated by the House Oversight Committee for conflict of interest and lying to the American people for personal gain, as well as pandering for future foreign oil company campaign donations. It is unlikely, though, that the Republican chairman, Darrel Issa, himself a convicted criminal will lift a finger to hold Boehner accountable.
The Republicans in Congress are the reason campaign finance reform will never move forward and the American people are the losers. Yes, Democrats also take oil industry and other special interest money, but only three Democrats voted to keep oil subsidies. Also, there is absolutely nothing wrong with John Boehner investing his taxpayer-funded salary in Canada’s tar sands oil companies, but there are ethical questions about his lying and push to build the Keystone XL pipeline that would give him a better return on his investments if it is built. The truth is, regardless of the legislator’s party affiliation, it is unfair to the American people to invest in, or sell votes to any special interest whether it is the tobacco or oil industry and then vote for personal or political profit. Unfortunately, America’s political system will stay polluted by corporate money and influence as long as Republicans fail to do the job they were elected to do; work for the interests of all the American people. Perhaps it is better to let Speaker Boehner’s words on the floor of the House make the point; “Shame on each and every one of you who substitutes your will and your desires above those of your fellow countrymen.”
Well said Mr. Speaker, well said indeed; you hypocrite.

New Battery Technology Is A Much Faster Charge

How about a fully charged electric car in 15 minutes?

New battery technology could change the way we power up

New battery technology could change the way we power up



Credit: KING 5 News





by GARY CHITTIM / KING 5 News
Bio | Email | Follow: @
Posted on February 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM



SEATTLE -- A new technology is emerging that could change the way we power up and it's being hatched right here in the Northwest. 
 
The new battery technology being developed by EnerG2 unlocks the power of carbon.  They can take a raw clump of stuff containing it, freeze dry it, remove the impurities and present pure carbon energy.  This is the battery of the future.
  
"Everybody's looking for that technology that will create the breakthroughs in battery and ultracapacitor and we think we have what that is and our customers agree," said EnerG2 COO Chris Wheaton.
 
The new technology could electrify a young electric car industry.
 
"That's the goal. To [make] gasoline [obsolete] through the use of battery technology that has the same density of gasoline itself," said Wheaton.
 
The problem with electrics has always been the time it takes to recharge, but what if you could charge up a car as quickly as you gas up? That changes everything.
 
They are not there yet, but engineers at EnerG2 feel they can get charge times down to 15 minutes.  And even more exciting, they think they can give  combustible engines the ability to shut down whenever they come to a stop. 
 
"The engine will turn off and the car will not idle. It will sit in a turned off state until you are ready to accelerate again off the line," said Wheaton.
 
Demand for the technology has jumped so quickly the EnerG2 company this week opened a new processing plant in Albany, Ore. and put 30 people to work.  And they are just getting started.
 
Work is underway in this lab to spread the same technology that can recharged a cordless screwdriver in 90 seconds to everything that runs on batteries.
 
The company says products made with it's carbon are also lighter, less expensive and easier to dispose of.