Category Archives: Energy

The Annual IEEE Electrical Power and Energy Conference Comes to Halifax

This year, IEEE Canada’s Annual Electrical Power and Energy Conference, the premier conference on Energy Generation, Distribution, and Markets held north of the 49th parallel, is in beautiful and historic Halifax, Nova Scotia from August 25 to August 27 at the Halifax Marriott Harbourfront Hotel.

The Call for Papers has been released and the topics up for consideration include:

  • Computational Intelligence Systems
  • Electricity Markets
  • Energy Storage
  • Wind Power
  • Solar Power
  • Wave & Tidal Power
  • Hydrogen Power
  • Bio-Thermal Power
  • Small Hydro Power
  • Fuel Cells
  • Smart Grid
  • Computational Methods in Power Systems
  • Transmission & Distribution
  • MicroGrids
  • Power System Communications
  • Energy Systems for Buildings
  • Energy Conservation and Efficiency
  • Technology Trends
  • Clean & Renewable Energy Markets
  • Novel Methods of Power Generation

During that time, you’ll also be able to enjoy Shakespeare by the Sea, Ghost Walks, the Nova Scotia Provincial Exhibition, and, if you stay an extra week to enjoy the uniqueness of Halifax and Nova Scotia, you can enjoy the 20th Atlantic Fringe Festival. (A complete list of summer festivals can be found on the Destination Halifax and Nova Scotia.com sites.)

So if you’re looking for a premier Energy Conference that usually attracts a few hundred leading researchers and practitioners from all over the globe, you might want to consider putting this conference in your sights. Not only do you get a great conference, but you also get a great location at a great time of year to boot!

Energy Utilization Is a Problem … But Water Consumption is a Bigger One!

The November 9th print edition of Canadian Business had an Opinion piece by Stewart Hall, titled “The Age of ‘Water Wealth’ Has Arrived in Canada”, that quoted a very scary statistic from the Water Footprint Network. The virtual water footprint of a full breakfast including juice, newspaper, milk, coffee, toast, two eggs and bacon weights in at a hefty 2,800 litres!

While one’s virtual water foot print is largely related to choice of diet, even a survival diet alone leaves a footprint of 1,000 litres per day. A vegetarian diet needs 2,600 litres and a high protein North American style meat-based diet runs the meter up to 5,000 litres of water per day. On top of this, we North Americans use twice as much water a day for our personal needs than our European counterparts, using 400 litres per day out of the tap to their 200, while a person in the developing world will use just 10 litres (and we each need 3 litres of water a day just to survive).

This isn’t a problem since the 71.1% of the Earth’s surface is covered by water, right? Wrong! Only about 3% of the water on the planet is safe to drink, and two thirds of that is locked up in glaciers and unavailable for consumption. That leaves a mere 1% of potable water for over 6.8 Billion people to share. And with the UN estimating that ground water is already being used at a rate of 4% beyond it’s replenishment rate, that tells us that even those of us who are water rich are going to be in trouble within 25 years while those of us who are water poor (like China, India, and Pakistan who are currently pumping out twice as much water out of the ground as rain is replenishing) could be in dire straits within 5 years.

We need to reduce our consumption and do it fast, because, unlike the energy shortage which could be easily fixed with a sufficient investment (which, unfortunately, is still much more than anyone wants to spend as almost all of the investment has to be made up front), there are no limitless sources of renewable “clean water” to match the almost limitless solar, wind, and hydro potential that we can tap into.

So if you really want to be a forward-thinking socially-responsible supply manager, make sure you select sources of supply and production processes with minimal water utilization. You’ll save big-time in the long run.

Share This on Linked In

Smart Cars Are Here, But Where Are Our Smart Grids To Charge Them?

The November 9th print edition of Canadian Business had an article by Heather Li on “Charging Cars for Pennies …” that had an amazing calculation that, if it were more widely known, could totally change the way we look at smart cars. By using wasted power, smart grids can charge electric cars for 42 cents a night!

Let’s see … in a fuel efficient car with gas prices at about $3 a gallon in the US and over $4 a gallon in Canada, you’re paying at least $30 in the US and at least $40 in Canada for a tank of gas that will get you the same 400km to 500km of travel that an electric car with a high-performance lithium-ion battery pack will get you … which could cost you a mere $0.42 to recharge. Now, it’s true that the batteries will eventually need to be replaced … but as the new battery packs have an estimated life of about 250,000 km, you might replace the smart car first!

How could we do it so cheap? It has to do with the fact that while our power demands fluctuate throughout a 24 hour cycle, power production does not. Water doesn’t stop flowing, nuclear reactions don’t stop half way through the chain, and it’s just not practical to shut down coal plants. As a result, much of the energy produced at night goes to waste. In Ontario, the difference between how much is used and how much is produced in off-peak night hours is often 10,000 mega-watts — which is potentially enough power to support one million electric vehicles! And, as you guessed, the power companies lose money on this production (which they make up for by charging a rate for energy consumption that covers the average total cost of production over a 24 hour period, and not just the cost of the energy you use). But if we had a smart grid, that utilized new smart meters, it could be programmed to charge our smart cars during times of peak excess energy availability and the power companies could charge us a fraction of a penny per kWh (or just a few dollars per MWh, instead of the average consumer price of $27.59 per MWh in Canada in November) and still make a profit.

Bring on the Smart Grids!

Share This on Linked In

The Most Often Overlooked Risk in Your Energy Supply Chain?

Is it the grid and the possibility of another great blackout (due to a lack of breakers)?

Is it the unpredictable terrorist act that could blow up a pipeline in North America (which includes friendly Canada)?

No, it’s Sciurus Carolinensis!

One little squirrel in one little circuit-breaker in one little substation can knock out power to 9,000 homes with a single nibble, as FirstEnergy customers in North Royalton found out on Tuesday.

Maybe Dark Verne has the right idea when he thinks we need to Get Rid of that Squirrel!.

“Surprise” Tariff Increase on Solar Panels

Editor’s Note: Today’s post is from Dick Locke, Sourcing Innovation’s resident expert on International Sourcing and Procurement. (His previous guest posts are still archived.)

The October 1 New York Times has an interesting article on a tariff increase on solar panels. While the panels came from China, that’s not the interesting part of the story. The interesting part is that CBP (The US Customs and Border Protection department — successor to the US Customs Service) announced the tariff increase eight months ago and nearly the entire solar panel industry missed it.

To summarize, one US company asked CBP for a classification ruling that would set duty rates for the solar panels they were importing. The company proposed using a semiconductor classification, as the rest of the industry was doing. CBP replied that solar panels were more complex and should be classified as DC generators. CBP published this ruling through normal channels and almost nobody noticed. Here are a few key paragraphs in the article:

“It is somewhat unusual for an industry to take as long as eight months to become aware of a customs ruling that affects it,” said Mel Schwechter, a partner at Dewey & Leboeuf in Washington and a former president of the Customs and International Trade Bar Association.

Customs decisions, even for a single importer, are made public on the agency’s Web site and on commercial Web sites, said Mr. Schwechter, who is not advising any of the participants in the dispute.

Mr. Resch said the growing industry lacked the resources to constantly track tax and regulatory decisions.

Duties will be doubled if customs officials determine that companies have been negligent in not paying them earlier.

Importers might also be liable for duties on all solar panels brought into the United States in the five years before the ruling if customs officials decide that the companies were guilty of “material misstatement or omission” for failing to notice sooner that solar panels had evolved to the point that they no longer met duty-free rules.

The duty on semiconductor devices is zero. The Times said the duties on DC generators is 3.5%. I think it’s 2.5% but my opinion is should not be relied upon for reasons I’ll explain below.

So what went wrong here? Mr. Resch is right, the industry “lacked the resources to constantly track tax and regulatory decisions.” What does that take? In the US, it takes a relationship with a very professional customs brokerage firm who would be under retainer to keep a client informed of regulatory decisions impacting the products a company imports. This is getting more difficult due to structural shifts in the customs brokerage industry. There used to be large, stand alone customs brokerage companies. Many importing companies had different companies doing their freight forwarding and customs brokerage. However, about five years ago two major customs brokers were purchased by UPS and Fed Ex respectively. The remaining customs brokers are much smaller companies. Importers can and should change freight forwarders if there are performance issues, but customs brokers are harder to change. They need detailed knowledge of their clients’ business and the learning curve can be steep.

Why shouldn’t you rely on my opinion on duties on generators? CBP can increase penalties for non-compliance if they determine an importer didn’t use “reasonable care” in their customs decisions. They look for an audit trail back to either a licensed customs broker or a customs attorney. I’m neither, so taking my advice wouldn’t meet the “reasonable care” test. I still think I’m right though.

Dick Locke, Global Procurement Group.

Share This on Linked In