Response #8 to "Geothermal Energy: Intelligent Use Of The Earth’s Heat"

Geothermal energy is a renewable source of energy in which the heat from the Earth's mantle is used to evaporate and heat water, and it can be used to heat homes and produce electricity. This is significant because no outside power is needed to be used, and the only byproducts of this process consist of steam (which will just fall as rain again) and the initial cost of setting up the process. You can't just drill a hole anywhere and expect to get geothermal heat from it. It varies as to how much there is, and the Western US is very fortunate in that it has a lot of potential spots. I-GET, which is a conference being held in Europe, is being held in part to address the limitations of the current technology and to develop more efficient ways of finding spots that contain geothermal heat, and then drilling down to it. Iceland, which is the world's most prominent user of geothermal heat, has doubled its supply of electricity. That shows how much potential geothermal energy has in the world.

Notes for "Geothermal Energy: Intelligent Use Of The Earth’s Heat"

Geothermal Energy is a renewable source of heat and energy because all the things that create it are created and caused by the Earth.
The heat is caused by the mantle's heat, and won't run out as long as the Earth is around.
The water which is evaporated becomes steam, and the water is completely renewable as it will fall again as rain.
Geothermal energy works by converting water to steam utilizing the heat from the Earth, and then using that steam (or hot water) to heat houses.
Iceland is the world leader in geothermal energy.
Iceland has doubled its electricity supply through the use of geothermal energy.
There is a conference being held in Europe regarding the use of geothermal energy, and about many projects that are going on right now around the world in geothermal energy, including technology that could have an impact on how attainable geothermal energy is.
The name of the conference is I-GET, which stands for Integrated Geophysical Exploration Technologies.
This conference has attracted scientists from around the world, including much of Europe, the USA, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.

Response #7 to "Australia's Biopower Systems to Develop Wave energy Projects with Spain's Elecnor"

like last weeks blog post, I am making an attempt to branch out of just solar and wind, as they aren't the only two sources of alternative energy. This latest article is about Hydro power, and specifically the company BioPower. Biopower is an Australian company that has an idea that could revolutionize the alternative energy business. Wave energy farms are energy farms that are on the bottom of oceans and use the constant ocean current to produce energy. Wave energy has been fraught with mistakes and failed designs, however, due to the sometimes brutal force of the ocean. The BioWAVE devices produced by BioPower are strong enough to withstand the ocean, are low impact on wildlife, and can't be seen from the surface. One thing holding wind energy back is the efforts by individuals to stop the building of wind turbines due to the fact that they block peoples views. (See the blog entry on NIMBY.) BioWAVE solves this problem and does so while having little to no negative impact on the environment.

Notes on"Australia's Biopower Systems to Develop Wave energy Projects with Spain's Elecnor"

Hydro power is the power generated by harnessing the movements of water.
A hydro power company named BioPower released details of an agreement between it and a Spanish development company named Elecnor.
This agreement signifies that BioPower's bioWAVE technology will be given a chance in the global energy market.
BioWAVE technology is a new development in what is called wave energy, where electricity is generated using the currents in the ocean.
Built correctly, wave energy producers can be durable, emit zero emissions, and not impact the environment in any way.
If built incorrectly, wave energy producers can break down because of the constant currents and storm and they can negatively impact marine life.
BioWAVE is light, strong and built in a way that doesn't impact marine life.
A demonstration project in Spain of BioPower and its technology could be ready as soon as 2011.
"'Wave energy is now emerging as a new clean energy source and we recognize many advantages if the right technology is used,' Esquivias said. 'BioPower appears to have solved the problems associated with earlier wave energy technologies and we are hopeful that their bioWAVE will be an enormous commercial success.'"

Response to "Nuclear Energy"

In creating this blog entry, I took two things into account from what my blog responders had posted. One remarked on how I hadn't touched on Nuclear Energy at all. The other ventured that a more basic approach could be useful. So the recent article I found, which is background research as it is not dated, was taken off a basic site and it covers nuclear energy. As stated in my notes, nuclear energy has NO emissions that contribute to global warming. Though I support solar and wind power the most, as both of them also have zero emissions without the added danger of nuclear waste, nuclear power loses less power in the transferring to electricity. Even efficient solar panels only have about a 20% efficiency rate while wind obviously only works when there is wind..
Nuclear energy always works, has zero emissions, and if a safe way to dispose of nuclear waste is discovered, it is definitely the way of the future.

Notes on "Nuclear Energy"

Nuclear energy is energy created in a nuclear reaction.
Nuclear reactions happen when there is a reaction within the nuclei of an atom.
Nuclear energy is produced both naturally and in man-made operations.
Man-Made: Humans can create atomic reactions through the use of fission (an atom is split by being shot at by a neutron,) or by fusion (in which the nuclei of atoms are split.
Naturally: All stars, including the sun, have nuclear reactions that happen which create both the star's light and heat.
Nuclear energy makes up about 16 percent of the worlds produced electricity.
There are no CO2 emissions, nor are there any other gaseous emissions. However, nuclear waste is created which is harmful to humans but does not contribute to global warming at all.
"Nuclear power plants need less fuel than ones which burn fossil fuels. One ton of uranium produces more energy than is produced by several million tons of coal or several million barrels of oil."
At Chernobyl in Russia, a nuclear power plant, due to faulty construction, there was a massive release of nuclear waste that is negatively affecting peoples health to this day and it renders the areas nearby unlivable.

Second Peer Blog Response

Each of the notes were very detailed and informative. Through glancing at each of the articles, the important parts of the written are present. However, all the background information relating to the article is at the beginning of the following response. As long as all the information is there, there's no concern, but try to keep all the factual information about the article in the notes so the response can be specifically for reflection.
As I said before, the responses give further information about the article and thoughtful analysis. There could definitely be more content in the responses, but the existing material is excellent. The readers want to know what the author feels about the topic, and the response is the perfect place express your opinion.
You did a great job not only sharing the various environmental problems, but also giving solutions and ideas. The next step is to keep that balance of content. Try to elaborate on different types of alternate energy. You discussed solar thoroughly, so maybe move in to nuclear or hydro. Keep an eye on Google News and other sources for the newest advancements in this topic. Your individual posts are related in a way so that the reader can follow your thought process.
Visually and technically your blog is perfect. All the links are live and the citation is proper. Although it is not required, I would suggest adding images or statistics to give depth to the blog. Everything is complete and posted, and there are even a few extra features. You are off to a great start.

Second Peer Blog Response

The notes written by the author of this blog are very thorough, and the responses all took a definite stance towards its corresponding article. I do not know much about "green" technology, so I cannot completely assess the validity of the responses, but their assertiveness had me quite convinced while I was reading them. Technology is a great thing for a continuing blog, because it is always advancing. I think this author will have plenty to explore in between now and April. The one thing this author could do a little bit better, I think, is explain basic concepts of Global warming, and green technology, for less knowledgeable people. Other than that, I can't see much wrong with the blog. It is very reader-friendly, and has an interesting visual style.

Response to"As Alternative Energy Grows, NIMBY Turns Green"

NIMBY is evil. It stands for Not in my Backyard, and what that essentially is in this context is that people who support alternative energy, and even the general green movement, will fight against having things like wind farms and solar panels in their "backyard." This is especially evident in Cape Cod, where efforts to build an immense wind farm that could power 75 percent of Cape Cod are being opposed by both the Massachusetts Historical Commission and the two most prominent local Native American tribes in the area. The Native American tribes are trying to get the sound listed as a historical site, which would block any efforts to build on it for at least a year. Edward Markey, a Massachusetts representative has urged that this wind farm be built, as it would show the world America is willing to put in the effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Notes on "As Alternative Energy Grows, NIMBY Turns Green"

A wind farm which was slated to be the first offshore wind farm in the US has been put on hold at least for now.
The wind farm project is being called Cape Wind on account of it being built off the coast of Cape Cod.
Local Native American tribes have opposed the building of the wind farm on account of the historical importance of that area off of Cape Cod.
The National Historic Register will decide within 45 days of the eleventh of November whether or not the sound will be protected or not.
The project would cost upwards of 1 billion dollars, but would be eligible for a cash subsidy and would end up consisting of about 130 wind turbines on the entire farm.
The finished project would generate 75 percent of Cape Cod's energy, and are projected to be barely noticeable.
NIMBY stands for Not in my Backyard, its used in this article as a way to emphasize that a lot of people support alternative energy sources, but as soon as they have to have the generators any where near them, they freak out. People are starting to support green energy as long as its built nowhere near them.
The article has two parts, and in the second part it states that if just two percent of the Mojave Desert was used to collect solar energy, all of the houses in California could be powered, which would cut emissions by 30 million tons a year.

Response to "Recycling Won't Save Us, but Greed Might."

Human beings depend on there being either a profit or immediate danger to create change. Or at least that's what Jon Meacham is saying in his latest article. For the most part, that's a true statement. Global warming can seem unreal to people living in a place that's not being changed drastically or noticeably by global warming. However to the people living in the Maldives, global warming is not only real, it is the reason they have been forced to essentially put aside a fund for buying a new homeland in case their current one gets submerged. So how does greed help? It simply provides an incentive, and a strong one at that, to people worldwide to invest and support alternative energy, regardless of whether it seems like the danger is immediate or even real.

Notes on "Recycling Won't Save Us, but Greed Might."

Meacham makes the argument that "My lightbulbs and Diet Coke cans are not going to make up for the CO2 pouring forth from China's coal fired plants."
Later in the article however, Meacham states a possible solution "What might begin to make up for those emissions is discovering how noncarbon sources of energy could become economically attractive."
If investors think they can make money in the alternative energy sector, then they will pour money into the sector.
Meacham implied that people won't actively see out ways to stop or reverse climate change unless there is money to be made in alternative energy.
The United Nations gave a report stating that investments in alternative energy was outpacing investments in fossil-fuels.
"Human beings change their behavior only when danger is imminent or when there is money at stake. For many Americans, global warming remains personally remote."
If alternative energy can become profitable then it can save the world AND make money at the same time.

Response to "Too Hot to Handle."

This article I just found came out of the magazine "Mother Jones." This article helped me quite a lot, not in learning new ideas about alternative energy, but getting a more solid base of knowledge about how the world views climate change as a whole. I also found about ppm, which is an important measure system based on the amount of CO2 in the world. right now it is around 387 ppm, and a healthy amount for the world would be 350 ppm. The amount that is taken as the highest possible right now without the world changing drastically is 450 ppm, but if so much has already happened just at 387 ppm, 450 ppm would be much worse. Developing countries are feeling like climate change and emissions shouldn't get in the way of them developing because after all the current rich and powerful got that way by burning the majority of the greenhouse gases in the world right now. They aren't responsible for the problem, so they shouldn't help fix it...I completely disagree. This article made a point about how important the Copenhagen talks are, and how if solid solutions aren't taken out of these talks, the world could change dramatically for the worse.

Notes on "Too Hot to Handle."

The meeting in Copenhagen is the most important meeting on the climate since the 1997 Kyoto treaty meetings.
Many developing countries feel that if developed countries got rich by essentially burning coal, they shouldn't be penalized for doing the same.
Scientists have said that the number to aim for is 350 ppm (parts per million CO2.) Right now it is around 387, and Copenhagen is thinking of making sure it doesn't go over 450. Anything above 450 has been said to have changes on Earth that could render civilization as it is now unrecognizably different.
If oil was burned up till 2030, but after that there was absolutely no more oil being used, the forests and ocean could bring CO2 levels back down to manageable amounts.
There is a 50 percent chance the lake behind the Hoover Dam could dry up by 2021.
The nation The Maldives, which is all on islands, is looking to buy a new homeland as it is getting swallowed up by the sea.
Both Europe and the Americas are reasonably open to stricter environmental regulations, but that would only limit these countries to 450 ppm, and at even 387 ppm the arctic is melting at an alarming rate, 30 years before it was predicted to happen.

Response to "Nanosolar Technology"

The latest article I found was all about the company Nanosolar, which is developing nanosolar technology. Essentially, nanosolar is a new way of thinking about solar technology. Nanosolar technology sacrifices a bit of efficiency for a greatly reduced price, enabling solar panels to purchased by a much larger market. The company owns two factories, and requires many workers with higher education, especially in the engineering field. The panels produced by the company are really are really more sheets, as they are very thin, bendable, and easily adjusted in size. The driving idea behind this product is ultra low cost, with the panels selling for as low as twenty dollars per square foot. I have always felt that solar power is the way of the future, but the one thing standing between a world powered by oil, and a world powered by the sun has been the cost. This product completely changes that idea, and it could be the turning point in our search of a replacement for oil.

Notes on "Nanosolar Technology"

Nanosolar is a company that is developing solar panels.
A barrier to more widespread use of solar panels has been there cost, but nanosolar has developed a fast and cheap way to produce them.
These "solar panels" are really are really more sheets, as they are very thin, bendable, and easily adjusted in size.
These affordable solar panels are being built to ultimately be cheap enough to go up on roofs around the country.
While not being as efficient as some other solar panels (which have about 20% efficiency, as opposed to the 15 - 16% efficiency in the nanosolar panels,) The ultra low cost ,20 dollars per square foot, more than makes up for it.
"Cells are assembled into circuits and laminated into panels. By using cells only from matched performance bins, mismatch losses within a panel are minimized to less than 0.1%" (1)
The company behind nanosolar technology has over 300 patents and a factory in Berlin, Germany, and San Jose, California.
The company has many job openings in the field of engineering.

Response to "Wheres the Next Boom? Maybe in Alternative Energy"

The article I recently found helped me because it gave me new information about alternative energy, most specifically what is now being dubbed "cleantech." Cleantech is essentially the Silicon Valley term for for alternative energy, and more efficient and newer ways to store energy and distribute it. One of the points of the article was that during recessions, often the best in American ingenuity comes out and lifts us out of that recession. Robertson, the author, feels that if America takes the lead in cleantech, that could be a major part of what pulls us out of this recession. With both our president and private investors putting money and effort into developing this, I feel that this idea could become a reality. One question I had after coming away from this article regarded whether or not cleantech, while definitely adding jobs, could also take them away from the less energy efficient sectors.

Notes on "Wheres the Next Boom? Maybe in Alternative Energy"

http://www.app.com/article/20091012/BUSINESS/910120301/1003/business&source=rss

Often in depressions, the next boom happens. Such as in 1870, telephones and phonographs, 1958, the integrated circuit, and early 1980's, the personal computer.
Venture capitalists have invested as much as 8.7 billion into energy related buisiness' since 2006.
A power plant will be built by a company called GreatPoint that will create thousands of jobs in 2010.
The Obama administration has said it will focus on putting more hybrid cars on the road, and also to invest 150 billion over the next decade into cleantech.
Cleantech could possibly create 5 million jobs, but 7.2 million have been lost since the recession started, and other jobs might be cannabalized by cleantech.
GE and HP are both already established companies that are taking advantage of the cleantech revolution andd investing in technologies.

Five Paragraph Essay

I am very interested in Alternative Energy, and I can easily see it holding my attention for a couple of simple reasons. First off, I have been interested in alternative energy sources for much longer than five months already, so it seems likely that I will stay interested in it. Also, it is essential to our world's future, so it will definitely impact my future, and possibly my plans for the future. I am not planning to become an engineer, or otherwise even work with alternative energy, but it could influence me to buy a more fuel efficient car, or maybe invest in a geothermal heating system for example.

The field of Alternative Energy is constantly changing, and there are constantly more effective ways of collecting energy being researched. This subject will continue to change, and will definitely be far different five months from now than right now. Fuel cell technology, for example, is a relatively new idea, but it is already a seriously researched field of technology.

This topic will be incredibly easy to find information on, with or without a computer, as many other sources have information about it as well. If I get on the computer and search "Alternative Energy" it comes up with more than 66 million hits, so there is no shortage of information out there. The daily newspaper has articles about it, Discover and National Geographic, even Rolling Stones, have articles on it. The problem with this topic isn't getting information about it, but about getting useful information.

Because the technology being developed for Alternative Energy is changing so much and so often it absolutely will provide a basis for ongoing research, and the information will definitely not be static. The budget for alternative energy is being increased by the American government, and all around the world governments and organizations are investing in alternative energy sources, and this should provide an interesting basis for ongoing research.

What I believe now is that Alternative Energy is very important to our planets survival, and I believe that my viewpoint will not change with my research. I believe that alternative energy is essential to our future as a planet, and I will not change my mind on that stance unless something insane is found out, like solar and wind power is whats actually causing global warming. But this issue will force me to dig deep into what information is out there, and I will be forced to to separate useless information and facts from actual information and ideas.