Engineering Materials

Wind Power: We Need More Real Support and Less Hot Air

Buried in the financial bailout bill that was signed into law last week was the renewal of production tax credits for renewable energy, such as wind power. Under the credit, generators receive a one-year, 30 percent reduction on construction costs, and the Incentive Tax Credit gives users an eight-year, 30 percent rebate on the installation of solar power systems. Even though wind and solar power make imminent sense, they still needs a boost from the U.S. government.  It’s hard to tell where the presidential candidates really stand on wind power. They both say they support it.

European producers are already a step ahead on wind power because of significant government assistance. The Danish National Advanced Technology Foundation awarded $5.4 million to blade maker LM Glasfiber for the development of an innovative blade technology based on the use of new types of fiber. “The new fibers will revolutionize the blade manufacturing process, and the research program, which aims to ensure that Denmark remains the world leader in wind energy, has been named ‘Blade King’,” stated an announcement.

European Commission Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament sets a target of  21 percent  of electricity demand in the EU to be covered by renewable energy sources by 2010. Key aspects of the directive include:
•    Streamlining of administrative procedures that precede the installation of a new plant;
•    Application of support schemes that compensate renewable electricity for its positive environmental impacts and its contribution to the security of supply;
•    Publication of guarantees of origin; and
•    Regulation of transparent mechanisms to bear the costs of technical adaptation.

Wow, Plastic Really is Good for the Environment

As I’ve written here before, I always brace myself when I see a story about plastics in newspapers or consumer magazines, like Time or Newsweek. The articles are always simplistic and often erroneous. Plastic is always bad. It’s made from oil. Plastic trash lines our roads.  It kills babies. It ruins the oceans. Etc.

What a surprise to read a report on plastics in last Sunday’s Boston Globe, one of the most liberal newspapers in America. The headline reads: ”In Praise of Plastic. Why an oil-sucking, landfill-clogging, non-biodegradable, it’s-everywhere material is so good for the environment. Really.”

The article states simple facts that plastics engineers have been saying for more than 20 years and virtually no one in the consumer media has listened to, or believed, I guess. For example, an author of an EPA study said that plastic packaging is better for the environment because it’s so much lighter than glass. “We were astonished, “said Frank Ackerman, an independent researcher. “Our guess was all wrong.” Several other examples are given. The article concludes that the real problem is that people won’t recycle products.

The wide-ranging report also looks at bioplastics, which I have long railed against as an environmental solution. The article correctly states that bioplastics will not compost in a landfill, and they  foul commercial recycling streams. They also don’t break down easily in oceans or forests. “Strange as it seems, it’s better for the environment to reuse (as many times as possible) and then recycle a bag you already own,” states the article.

Wow. Someone is listening at last.

There are some errors in the article. The Dreamliner, for example, is not made from a type of acrylic. And I don’t agree with all of the conclusions. In my opinion, waste-to-energy is an excellent use for waste plastic, for example. The thermal value of a polyethylene plastic bag is significantly better than coal – and with no pollutants. This makes more sense to me than running up the recycling rate of plastic bags.

Liquidity Crunch Could Affect Cash-Raising at Startups

Design engineers surely will feel some heat from the current financial liquidity crisis, even assuming the proposed bailout plan is enacted and has a positive effect. It will be hard, particularly in the short-term, for companies to raise capital. All companies are affected, but the hardest hit will be small, entrepreneurial firms that are burning cash. One area of concern could be the fledgling companies that are attempting to build a bioplastic industry in the United States. The Chief Operating Officer at Cereplast, a bioplastic startup in California, announced a decision to concentrate all manufacturing at a plant n Seymour, IN and focus sales activities on a smaller, targeted group of prospects. The move comes as Cereplast prepares for the second phase of a previously announced joint development agreements with Danone and Peugeot-Citroen. Big companies will also feel at least some pain. GE announced it will take on less debt in the fourth quarter to improve its financial liquidity.  Less debt means less spending. Will that mean some slowdown in development of its aggressive wind energy program? We don’t know right now. GM is putting significant financial muscle into Chevy Volt even though its cash position is weak. GM is looking for federal help, possibly in the form of tax benefits, to ease purchasing of the Volt.