[p2p-research] [Open Manufacturing] Fwd: there is no energy crisis

[marc fawzi]

The part about the world running out of Indium and Gallium smells
funny to me, based on the following:

1. ITO (Indium Tin Oxide) is the transparent conductor used in LCD
displays, on this very Mac I'm using and billions of other laptops in
current and former use.  See:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ito+coating&btnG=Search

2. Gallium Arsenide is used in most IR and near-IR laser diodes (since
the 60s) and all blue laser diodes use Gallium Nitride. These lasers
are used in all CD and DVD players today, billions of them. However,
the amount of Gallium used in each diode is microscopic compared to
the amount of indium used in LCD displays. But to say that we will not
have blue/IR lasers because we're running out of Gallium is a little
bit funny.

3. Gallium Arsenide is used in most very high frequency FETs (field
effect transistors) which are in wide spread use in
telecommunications...

I hardly have any credentials in the solar or semiconductor space
(besides helping students at Northeastern U. design a solar racer) but
had worked with lasers and flat panel display tech at the R&D stage
back in the early 90s when making a blue laser entailed IR beam
doubling via birefringent nonlinear crystals (a $100,000 setup at
least)  and we used ITO in fabricating flexible displays and
architectural lighting.

So one German scientist said we're running out of Indium and/or
Gallium.... What does it mean to base a conclusion on what one
scientist's statements?

Marc


On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Michel Bauwens
<michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
> This is a rather strong challenge to the piece published here,
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/can-distributed-renewable-energy-solve-the-energy-crisis-right-now/2009/02/19,
> and which contains Vinay's optimistic assessment on the energy crisis,
>
> Michel
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Kurt Cobb <kurtcobb2001 at yahoo.com>
> Date: Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:15 AM
> Subject: Re: there is no energy crisis
> To: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
>
>
> Michel,
>
> Where to start?  I know nothing of Mr. Gupta other than what you have linked
> to so I cannot comment on his credentials or record.  But I can say this
> about his statements. Solar companies, especially the ones involved in
> thin-film research, have often made extravagant claims in the past that have
> turned out to be nothing more than hype designed to get them funding and
> media attention.  What they claimed they could do, they simply could not
> deliver.  Whether Nanosolar will be just another in a long line of hype
> artists, we can't tell at this point.  I would, however, suggest checking
> out the figures quoted to make sure Nanosolar actually put them in a public
> release.
>
> What I can tell from their website is that they are using the same rare
> minerals in their substrates as other thin-film makers, namely, indium and
> gallium.  Let's assume for the moment that Nanosolar does, in fact, have a
> revolutionary new process.  Will that process actually bring down the cost
> of thin-film solar or will it hit a bottleneck when it comes to the
> available indium and gallium supplies?  One scientist in Germany has
> attempted to catalog our known reserves of indium which is used extensively
> also in flat panel displays.  He figures we have 15 years left at current
> rates of usage.  And if we have a large new user such as thin-film solar,
> then the supply would be gone that much faster. (Amazingly, nobody else has
> attempted to find out how much of these critical rare minerals we might have
> left!)
>
> As for gallium, well, there are no gallium mines.  Gallium is a byproduct of
> copper mining. So, you are at the mercy of the level of activity in the
> copper mining industry for your supplies, and right now that level is
> declining sharply because of the worldwide economic contraction.  Nobody
> mines copper for the gallium content.  It simply isn't economical and never
> will be since the amounts are so miniscule in the ore.
>
> So, we have a straightforward resource bottleneck for critical inputs.  But,
> Nanosolar will just come up with a substitute, you may say.  Yes, perhaps,
> but when?  Keep in mind that the claims they are making are based on their
> current technology which uses these inputs and they are not anticipating
> that they will have to find substitutes for these.
>
> Second, there are the problems of scale and time.  If you have a very long
> time, say, several decades the build up production and distribution of
> thin-panel solar and you assume improvements and substitutions of more
> plentiful inputs for the rare metals, then perhaps you can get the kind of
> solar electric revolution Mr. Gupta speaks of.  But if you need to make the
> change, say, in the next decade, then you are going to find it difficult to
> build the plants, find or train the necessary people and distribute the
> product widely in such a short period of time on the scale necessary.  If
> you are faced with falling fossil fuel supplies at the same time, you will
> find it hard to pay for the fossil fuel energy which must be used initially
> to do most of what you need to do.
>
> Third, there is the problem of energy return on energy invested, often
> abbreviated EROEI.  Solar thin-film is highly inefficient compared to
> conventional solar.  You are going to need an awful lot of it simply to keep
> up with growth in electricity demand let alone substitute for fossil-fuel
> generated electricity.  Solar has an very low EROEI compared to say coal.
> Coal can be as high as 80 to1.  Solar is around 2 to 1 at best.  We are
> going from a very high density energy source to a low-density energy
> source.  Which means we are going to need far more space and resources just
> to deploy it.
>
> Fourth, the real energy shortage we face in the near-term is liquid fuels.
> Solar panels do nothing to help alleviate that problem.  Sure, we could
> electrify our transportation system, something for which I am a strong
> advocate.  But then we are back to the scale and time problem.  How fast do
> we need to do this and at what scale?  My answer is very fast and at a very
> large scale.  These two are hard to reconcile.
>
> I've discussed these issues in a series of columns for Scitizen.  The titles
> that are relevant are: Receding Horizons for Alternative Energy Supplies,
> Will the Rate-of-Conversion Problem Derail Alternative Energy? ,How Many
> Windmills Does It Take to Power the World? and Charlie Hall's Balloon Graph.
>
> The coming energy transition, in my view, will be difficult and fraught with
> missteps--if it succeeds at all. The simple solutions that are being bandied
> about now distract from our main task, namely, drastically cutting back our
> energy use to that we can live within the meager amounts of energy that
> renewable energy will actually be able to provide.  I believe this is
> possible.  But it won't happen if everyone is led to believe that there is
> an easy supply solution just waiting for us.
>
> Before I close, let me say that I believe your thinking about our need for
> decentralized, regional and local systems of governance, industry and food
> production is right on target.  The tools we have, especially the Internet,
> offer excellent ways to help coordinate this transition.  But these networks
> of communication need to be face-to-face right in our communities as well
> and that work is a bit harder.
>
> Keep up the good work and good thinking you are doing.  I hope the
> information I've provided will be useful to you.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Kurt Cobb
> Resource Insights
>
> ________________________________
> From: Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>
> To: kurtcobb2001 at yahoo.com
> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 11:16:03 PM
> Subject: there is no energy crisis
>
> Dear Kurt,
>
> I wonder if I could ask you for a reaction, it doesn't have to be long, or
> perhaps you can point me to an existing piece on the topic,
>
> on the claim expressed by Vinay Gupta in the piece which I'll publish on the
> 20th , on our p2p blog which is read by about 2,000 people daily,
>
> see
> http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/can-distributed-renewable-energy-solve-the-energy-crisis-right-now/2009/02/20
>
> he claims that: there is no energy crisis, pointing to developments like
> nanosolar etc..., see below for the full text of that entry:
>
>
> text:
>
> Can distributed renewable energy solve the energy crisis, right now???
>
> Michel Bauwens
> 20th February 2009
>
> in real terms, even when you factor in all of those costs, solar power is
> likely to produce power at about half the cost of the cheapest coal-fired
> power plants
>
> Nanosolar, Konarka, and the dozens of other solar power outfits who are
> pushing the price of solar down, down, down below the price of coal power,
> and towards the a few cents a watt for the panel, meaning your daylight
> power comes down below 1 cent per kilowatt hour, or maybe 20% of the
> cheapest current grid power. The whole world is going to get electricity. In
> many areas, this will immediately lead to vast improvements in lifestyle and
> economic productivity as electric tractors, pumps, daytime-factories and
> many other applications are found for the newfound power.
>
> Both citations are from Vinay Gupta.
>
> But some background first.
>
> From my research for the P2P Foundation, I have come to the conclusion that
> a P2P-based society would be based on a set of inter-related
> infrastructures:
>
> - a distributed communication and coordination infrastructure, which we
> essentially already have, despite its imperfections (some would argue we
> need a distributed decision-enabling infrastructure on top of that, but I
> think that a virtual infrastructure is not essential, and that the tools for
> open and transparent government are also essentially there)
>
> - a distributed money infrastructure: we need civil-society based mutual
> credit and open money systems that can be used both locally and for online
> affinity groups. Many of the tools are already available.
>
> - distributed agriculture and manufacturing: this is the part which has been
> emerging with open design communities, on which Marcin Jakubowski is working
> with his Open Source Ecology project. I think we need about 15 more years
> for substantial achievements in this area.
>
> If I have not forgotten anything else, this leaves one more important
> infrastructure: peer to peer energy, i.e. the ability to produce energy at a
> hyperlocal scale.
>
> Readers who will have read Mike Davis take on global warming, may be
> convinced that our efforts in renewable energy and carbon capping are
> failing.
>
> But amongst our network of experts, Vinay Gupta of Global Swadeshi takes a
> rather radical point of view. While it does not negate the damage that can
> be done through our continued use of fossil fuels, it does suggest that Peak
> Oil is not such a fundamental drawback for the next phase of civilisation
> based on distributed renewable energies.
>
> In fact, says Gupta, these alternatives already exist, and just have to be
> implemented:
>
> "There's no energy crisis. If we work on scaling plastic solar panel
> manufacture, we'll cut human CO2 emissions by 40% (the proportion currently
> produced by coal) in 20 years because it will simply be uneconomic to keep
> the coal plants burning."
>
> For evidence, he points to Nanosolar, about which he gives the following,
> rather amazing figures: "Panel cost of manufacture is said to be $0.30 per
> watt. Panel cost at retail is around $1. Price of a machine which will print
> panels: $0.16 per panel per year."
>
> He explains: "So what does this mean in terms of electricity supply? Simply
> put, it means that in some applications, solar power's real cost is about
> half that of a coal fired power plant today and it's only going to get
> cheaper. We're likely to see solar displace nearly all of the world's coal
> plants within 20 years, cutting CO2 emissions by 40%."
>
> And this is just the beginning, a competing project, Konarka Technologies,
> "thinks their panels will be about 1/3 the price of nanosolar. In about a
> year or so."
>
> WorldChanging reports that a same kind of promising development may be about
> to happen in windpower:
>
> "The Jellyfish will do for the wind power industry what the personal
> computer did for the computer industry. Although the engineering community
> likes to think bigger is better, Maglaque said, we should remain open minded
> about using both big and small turbines to power the renewable energy
> revolution."
>
> "A mere 36 inches tall, the plug-in wind appliance can generate about 40
> kilowatt hours each month, that's enough to light a home using
> high-efficiency bulbs, said Maglaque. And although micro-wind is nothing
> new, at $400 a pop, the Jellyfish's price and simplicity make it a fresh
> face in the market."
>
> The participative, peer to peer, aspects of this potential new distributed
> energy are well described in the article:
>
> "Maglaque hopes that the Jellyfish will soon be an item you can purchase at
> any local hardware store, just like a vacuum or blender. And with the
> combination of access, affordability and easy assembly, he hopes that
> eventually we will see his invention on every rooftop. While that level of
> ubiquity is, of course, the hope of any inventor, Maglaque also has a bigger
> vision: bring massive change to our relationship with energy creation. No
> longer would energy be something that we switch on mindlessly, and utility
> bills something that we begrudgingly pay monthly. Instead, personal wind
> power would allow us to generate energy, involving us in the process instead
> of just delivering uncontrollable results.
>
> As with other personal renewable energy tools, this one could help us create
> energy, sell it back to the grid, watch as our energy bills drop and
> hopefully witness the creation of a better, more reliable grid system
> through our investment in the utility.
>
> One vision that Maglaque shared was for the Jellyfish to help enable
> district wind energy co-ops. Imagining thousands of personal wind turbines
> all creating energy for the grid. He said neighbors could join together to
> work collectively with the power utilities.
>
> "Say you've got 10,000 units in one city. If you connect those units on a
> server, and generate power together — managing and regulating that power —
> you are in a position to work with power utilities," Maglaque said. "This is
> good for customers because it provides a marginal return, and utilities like
> this as well because a: you have on demand power, and b: you free up funds
> to be allocated to the grid network that needs expansion and repair."
>
> Another hope of Maglaques's is for the Jellyfish to help people in
> developing countries leapfrog over dirty energy and jump more quickly into
> renewables."
>
> This entry was posted on Friday, February 20th, 2009 at 3:53 pm and is filed
> under P2P Energy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS
> 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Edit
> this entry.
>
> One Response to "Can distributed renewable energy solve the energy crisis,
> right now???"
>
> Michel Bauwens Says:
> February 16th, 2009 at 5:21 am e
>
> Kevin Carson, via email:
>
> "In general terms I agree, although I don't know enough to have an
> opinion about whether some form of photovoltaic will pan out and beat
> fossil fuels in terms of EROEI.
>
> But more generally, all the building blocks of an alternative,
> decentralized and less energy-guzzling economy are out there and ready
> to adopt. As Amory Lovins et al argued in Natural Capitalism, the
> main thing holding it back is cultural inertia and path dependency.
> When energy prices get high enough, they'll overcome that inertia.
> And according to Lovins et al, just the low-hanging fruit (things like
> replacing trucks with trains and cogenerating power from industrial
> waste heat) could eliminate more than half our current fossil fuel
> consumption.
>
> On a more radical level, the building blocks are already out there for
> local, small-scale manufacturing economies, as well as the
> prerequisites for shifting a considerable portion of production to the
> household or neighborhood barter economy. As little known as they
> are, I expect skyrocketing energy prices and a collapse of much of the
> wage economy to make it a lot easier for those currently involved with
> such technologies to promote them. For example, almost nobody in the
> conventional building industry knows about passive solar cooling by
> running intake pipes underground. But some people, scattered around
> the country, do have it. And when the cost of air conditioning a
> conventional tract house rises to $300 a month, I expect a guy whose
> house is cooled for $0 a month to generate some hellacious word of
> mouth in surrounding neighborhoods.
>
> As I've also argued elsewhere, I expect small machine shops and
> backyard hobby shops to become the basis of a localized industrial
> economy, under pressure of necessity, when the supply chains of the
> centralized corporate industrial economy collapse. This was the focus
> of my discussion of S.M. Stirling's fictional industrial economy in
> the Nantucket trilogy, which I raised in an exchange with Samantha
> Atkins on the Open Manufacturing list.
>
> Coupling such distributed manufacturing with microenterprises
> (bakeries, day care centers, cab services, market gardens,
> microbreweries, etc.) run out of people's homes using their ordinary
> household capital equipment, and with liquidity provided by LETS
> systems if the old currency collapses, I think thriving local
> economies will expand to fill the gap pretty quickly under pressure of
> necessity.
>
> One thing that will help the transition will be if the U.S.
> government, state governments, and other "hollowed out states" lack
> the capability of enforcing bank ownership of paper on defaulting
> mortgagers, and we can transition as the banks collapse to a default
> system of ownership based on current possession. That, and no
> last-ditch effort at large-scale police statism to enforce the DMCA
> and suchlike.
>
> FWIW, I also expect the collapse to be a long one (a "long emergency")
> taking around two decades, so there will be no catastrophic collapse
> and sudden vacuum to fill. But even when collapses have been
> catastrophic, as in Argentina early in the decade, people have been
> extremely resilient and creative in finding ways to make things work
> in the face of necessity."
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>
>
>
>
> --
> Working at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University -
> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html -
> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
> Volunteering at the P2P Foundation:
> http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net -
> http://p2pfoundation.ning.com
>
> Monitor updates at http://del.icio.us/mbauwens
>
> The work of the P2P Foundation is supported by SHIFTN,
> http://www.shiftn.com/
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Open Manufacturing" group.
> To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
>