An interview with Dr. David Mills, Chief Scientific Officer and Founder of Ausra:

Dr. David Mills has worked in the alternative energy field for over 30 years. He was born and raised in Canada and educated in Australia. In his University of Sydney lab he developed and licensed the evacuated-tube solar water heater technology, which consists of about 60 percent of the world’s solar collectors and created an advanced double cermet selective absorber coating, which is used in tube receivers by Chinas largest solar company. He also invented or co-invented the Prism solar concentrator (Sol X) and the S evacuated tube reflecting system (Solahart). He’s saved his best for last however, with his pioneering Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector (CLFR) technology, which is what is presently being manufactured for utility-scale thermal solar power.

Solar thermal uses fields of special mirrors to shine the sun’s energy on water-filled piping, which then boils and turns it into steam to run turbines that produce electricity. There is no pollution or use of photovoltaics (solar panels). This technology is literally changing the way our planet will supply its every increasing need for energy free of fossil fuels or dangerous by-products. It provides green jobs, helps stop global warming, is cost effective and can be on the ground running within the next few years. All of North America and Europe’s electrical power needs (day and night) can be generated with this system, by using a desert land area less than 92 by 92 square miles. The parts for solar thermal power plants will soon be available for the world’s leading polluters (China, India, Europe and the U.S.), as well as other continents.
post resumes below image

Ausra’s revolutionary solar field design consists of several mirrors sharing a receiver. This lowers the cost of the mirrors while greatly reducing overall plumbing required.

Dr. Mills and his company (Ausra) have already signed contracts with one of the largest power companies in North America (Pacific Gas & Electric) to deliver 177 megawatts; are building the first U.S. manufacturing plant for solar thermal power systems in Las Vegas, Nevada; and plan on having a pre-commercial demonstration project up and running by the end of this year. One of the other largest utility companies in The States (Florida Power & Light) and its parent (FPL Group), have also taken a close look at Dr. Mills solar thermal technology. Their chairman and CEO, Lewis Hay, states, “As the operator of the largest solar energy facility in the world, we view this breakthrough technology as a promising option.”

I recently interviewed Dr. Mills at Ausra’s headquarters in Northern California. He shared some of his thoughts and insights about the environment, our energy needs and the quickest way to transform our fossil fuel economy to a solar and all-electric society.

Gabriel Constans (GC): It appears that the technology you are using at your present and future power plants can literally change the world and the way it obtains its energy needs. Do you realize that you are someone who, in many respects, could be seen as one of the great scientists and innovators of the century?

Dr. David Mills (DM): This kind of technology will certainly change how we produce and generate energy. This technology can be the big gorilla of generating energy. Presuming the electrified auto sector, it will soon be electricity and oil, not the other way around. There are already 3 battery companies that have batteries which can recharge electric car batteries in minutes. If you put that together with generating technology which is readily available on the grid, you have the ingredients to say we don’t need oil anymore, we don’t have to import oil.

GC: Is there enough private, organizational and government interest to adopt this technology?

DM: These things are world changing in many ways. The common term would be disruptive technology. It isn’t necessarily that way, in a negative fashion, but it does change things. It is positive disruption, though there will be winners and losers. If you look at the rail traffic in the U.S., 80% of it involves carrying fuel. If you don’t need it to carry fuel anymore, than you’re going to have to re-evaluate that industry. On the other hand, if you look at glass (used for solar reflecting mirrors, parts and tubing), it will probably double or triple that industry. Steel will stay about the same, but turbine production will be bigger than ever. There will be a lot of impacts on the economy, but in the end, in terms of employment and energy efficiency, the economy will be a superior economy.

GC: At what point are you in the process? When will you figuratively turn on the switch?

DM: We have developed a proprietary system to store energy. We’ll be developing and demonstrating this storage unit at a pre-commercial test facility in California this year. We anticipate that we’ll have energy storage commercialized by 2010. Having a turbine built and delivered is presently between 2-3 years. It’s the turbines which may cause some delay, not the know-how or technology. Similar companies, (such as Sterling) are facing the same issue. What convinces people is a plant on the ground. One can wave their arms around a lot at conferences, but the real deal is to have it working, having it connected to utilities and having it operating reliably. At that point people will get it.

Dr. David Mills

GC: How is thermal solar technology being accepted in the rest of the world?

DM: The entire field is going to progress very quickly. The greatest development is taking place right now, especially in the U.S. In Europe that isn’t so much the case. They set up a system called “feed in law” which is giving a comfortable amount of income to companies. They could continue to take the old designs and run with it for security. Here (in the U.S.) the market is tougher and more competitive, which means costs are kept down, so were seeing real development going on here. In my opinon, they aren’t lowering the feed in laws fast enough in Europe. For it to work around the world, you have to set up parallel corporations that can be competing in markets using these technologies. There are already other companies in the U.S., as well as other countries and companies that are interested. This will happen, but to manage this great of growth is going to be a serious challenge. There are many places that need electricity for social betterment, but social betterment is not the same thing as environmental rescue. They both have to be done. It’s a matter of prioritization.

GC: How did this all come about?

DM: I came up with this design and system independently, but once I did research I discovered that at least 2 other groups had attempted to go down this path before. One in the 1960’s built a small unit, including an Italian that built one in Southern France and another in the U.S. that tried but didn’t get very far with funding. We basically resurrected the idea. Other companies that are doing similar projects descended from us in one way or another. They’re all people that were involved with us or came in contact with us.

GC: What will it take to get power from companies using solar thermal technology to the public?

DM: We don’t have to put in an entirely new infrastructure for this technology, in the short term. In about 10 years you’ll get to the point were you need new power lines and new cross-continental low-loss DC lines to get that power to heavy population centers, like in the North East. People are going to have to get used to the idea that just like we have a trans-continental highway system, we need a trans-continental transmission system. Similar discussions are going on in Europe, such as the transmission of power from North Africa into Europe. We can build these things very quickly. What is generally the limitation is the present infrastructure, which people tend to like to run until it dies. Most of the existing plants will be gone in 40 years. If we decide on a Marshall Plan for energy, it’s possible to have it completed in 25 years. It would have to be global and would be the biggest thing ever. It would be an infrastructure that benefits everyone all the time. No matter what happens, its going to be a profitable exercise for people.

GC: Aren’t people reluctant to trust large corporations and power companies? Isn’t that why there has been such a push over the last 20 years for people to be independent and to have individual sources of energy for their own home or business?

DM: People sometimes confuse their dream of autonomy and independence from utility payments with the desire to be free of entanglements. The fact is, our economy involves a lot of people, a lot of transport, there is a lot of industry and community activity that goes on. It isn’t just an individual home owner off by themselves. The home is not the major part of electricity consumption or source of pollution. We shouldn’t be afraid of a utility scenario. From a practical point of view, it’s easier to put in a number of large plants very quickly, compared to convincing everyone individually that this is a good idea. In the end, both kinds of societies are possible, but I think this one can go much more quickly. It’s not to say the small scale won’t work, it’s simply a matter of time. Right now, we can change the amount of green electrons flowing through everyone’s circuits instead of a few. The source will be different, though the electricity is the same and we don’t have to change a lot of infrastructure. People shouldn’t be afraid of the large utility companies just because they’re large.

It only takes about 92 miles by 92 miles of a solar thermal plant to fulfill the energy requirements for North America and Europe. That’s not big. That’s smaller than a mining footprint for coal. It’s a benign system. People living next to this type of technology don’t mind them. We’re finding its more acceptable than wind power. Thermal solar power already exists. We can also store the energy created, so it carries us throughout the year and in all kinds of weather. It’s possible here and now and throughout the world.

For years engineers and utilities have been waxing on and on about the future of the utility grid and the economic importance of having a smarter, more flexible infrastructure for distributing electricity. But the conversation goes silent when it comes to the price tag: $1.5 trillion.

There’s no doubt that a radical improvement needs to be made to the aged infrastructure that carries electricity from generation plants to homes and businesses. Some places on the grid, like stretches between L.A. and San Diego, are as congested as the freeways at rush hour.

This is where energy intelligence comes in. Energy intelligence is often defined as a subsector of traditional energy efficiency, focused on utility-scale distribution, grid connectivity and two-way communication with end users and devices. It becomes part of the nervous system that helps connect and make the grid more sentient.

By using energy intelligence technologies, grid-connected utilities and providers will be able to manage their generation and supply in accordance with end-user usage patterns. And that means power is distributed more intelligently to minimize load and enable active power-distribution management to optimize resources.
post resumes below image

It may cost the U.S. $1.5 trillion to upgrade to a smart grid. (Source: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)

With the new infrastructure in place, customers can make informed decisions about their energy use, so they can purchase it at times when it’s cheapest. The way to make much of that happen is with smart meters and power management dispatched to homes and businesses where they will deliver savings and improved efficiency.

Trouble is, the next phase of bringing solar and wind energy sources online will require more engineers trained in power electronics. Unfortunately, power electronics was taught widely at universities 20-30 years ago but now few teach it.

“Power electronics is really going to be the critical area, along with interface technologies for converting AC current to DC and vice versa,” says Dick DeBlasio, laboratory program manager for electricity programs at the National Renewable Energy Labs in Boulder, Colorado.

It is part of an evolutionary process that aims to bring a grid built on 50-year-old analog technology up to speed with the 21st century shift to digital. “Interoperability is really the big part of the focus for researchers and engineers,” says DeBlasio. Part of the problem is where to place sensors in buildings and on the distribution system.

The control and monitoring of the smart grid it is not easily done, as an estimated 10-15 percent of energy is lost in delivery. Another critical item for the future of the grid is storage and government R&D in this area has been abysmal for a long time.

The targeted areas for smart-grid R&D activities are in four basic categories: architecture and communication standards; monitoring and load-management technologies; monitoring and control for demand-side management; advanced components and operating concepts. . “We have a chance to be an early adopter of this technology,” said John Kunhart, managing director and co-founder of American River Ventures in Roseville, CA., at a recent panel discussion on Energy Intelligence: Investment, Risk and Regulation for Advanced Connectivity and Infrastructure sponsored by the VC Task Force.

Standardized architectural designs and interfaces are important to stimulate developments toward a smart grid. As part of that effort, universal standards have been proposed, like the IEEE 1547 series of standards on interconnecting distributed resources with electric power systems by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

So what will it take for energy intelligence to reach its potential and simultaneously reward investors? Successful growth in this area will require a detailed understanding and navigation of the complex interplay of risk mitigation, regulation and regulatory influence, and infrastructure development. –Lee Bruno

The attention some of the electric automobile designs have attracted over the past few years has tended to take the focus away from bikes and motorcycles. But for every Volt or Tesla making a splash in the news, dozens of models of electricity powered two-wheelers have been selling by the thousands for years. In aggregate, millions of electricity powered bikes are already in use around the world.

Should anyone doubt the electric scooter industry is alive and well, if not already gone through several cycles of maturity, go to Alibaba.com and search under “Electric Scooters.” You will get links to an astonishing 6,903 products, ranging from Suzhou Rununion Motivity Co., Ltd., to Wuxi Beiyi Electric Bicycle Co., Ltd., to Taizhou Wangpai Automobile Industry Co., to Jiangsu Taler Science and Technology of Motor Vehicle Co., to Jiangsu Xinling Motorcycle Manufacturing Co. , and on, and on, and on, and on. And small wonder - you can plug them in at night, ride them to work during the day, they’re relatively inexpensive to purchase, and they’re considerably less expensive to operate.

Now that electric bikes, scooters and motorcycles are making sense not only on the streets of Shanghai but also on the streets of Silicon Valley, there are some relatively new entrants in this market based in California instead of China. One such company, ELV Motors, based in Santa Clara, in the heart of California’s Silicon Valley, manufactures mo-peds as well as scooters. Their UM 44L Electric Bicycle, which sells for $1,699, has a top speed of 15 miles per hour, and a range - not including range extension through pedaling - of 20 miles. And at 75 pounds, the bike is practical to pedal in flat terrain without battery power. ELV Motors manufactures seven models of mo-peds and scooters, including the E-1600 Electric Scooter, which at the price of $2,699 attains a top speed of 30 miles per hour and a range of 40 miles.

Another company, ZERO Motorcycles, is located in Santa Cruz, California, a coastal resort community which is a 30 minute drive south of the Silicon Valley through some of the most beautiful rolling hills of redwood forests anywhere. ZERO Motorcycles draws on Santa Cruz’s reputation as one of the original centers of mountain biking alongside their proximity to the technological saavy of Silicon Valley to develop the first ever off-road, all-electric dirt bike. Their Zero X model (specifications) delivers 23 horsepower of power and can accelerate from zero to 30 miles per hour in under two seconds. There is no transmission and the electric motor delivers constant torque of 50 ft-lbs. With a 18 pound frame and a total weight of only 140 pounds, ZERO claims their Zero X model has the highest power to weight ratio of any electric vehicle. With lithium ion batteries the motorcycle has a range of about 40 miles.
post resumes below image

The Zero X electric motorcycle goes zero to thirty in 2.0 seconds. (Photo: ZERO Motorcycles)

An electric car with a mileage of 4.0 miles per kilowatt-hour would compare to a compact car with a mileage of 30 MPG. At $1.50 per gallon, that equates to $.05 per mile for the gasoline powered car, and at $.10 per kilowatt-hour, that equates to $.025 per mile for the electric powered car - half as much. To save money on gas, people are turning to motorcycles; to save even more money, they might consider the emerging electric motorcycle. With well established supply chains for electric scooters and mo-peds, and an electric dirt bike now available from ZERO Motorcycles, it is only a matter of time before street-legal, full sized electric motorcycles arrive. If the example from ZERO is any indication, these bikes will perform against their gasoline powered counterparts just as admirably as the early Teslas perform against their gasoline powered automobile counterparts.

The Indian government has welcomed biofuels with open arms. Faced with a rapidly growing economy, the world’s second-largest population and an eye-watering fuel import bill, finding a renewable domestic power source has become a top priority.

The country’s recently-revised national biofuel policy, announced in September 2008, sets out the government’s intentions in black-and-white: to produce 20 per cent of the country’s diesel from crops by 2017, primarily from plantations of jatropha (Jatropha curcas). This means that the oilseed-bearing shrub, already introduced in some states, needs to be planted on an additional 14 million hectares of the country’s so-called ‘wasteland’. This has ignited fierce debate: supporters see the move as the solution to the fuel-versus-food conundrum, while critics are fearful that millions of peasants, who rely on these lands, will lose out.

Wasteland - a misnomer

A far cry from the post-industrial ‘brown field’ sites familiar to planners in the developed world, India’s wastelands have historical resonance. Classified in colonial times as areas that could not be cultivated and which were, therefore, unable to produce revenue, everything from forests to semi-jungle to wetlands fell into the category of ‘wasteland’. But, quite unlike the idea of a barren wilderness, these vast areas - comprising about 25 percent of India’s landmass - are more appropriately described as marginal lands, and have supported millions of the country’s poorest people for centuries.

‘Wastelands’ are a vital source of fodder for poor rural livestock keepers. (Photo: WREN Media)

Traditionally, local communities have looked after these lands as common resources, coming to depend on them for food, fodder, fuel wood and medicine. In terms of their day-to-day importance, the figures speak for themselves: around 20 percent of poor households’ income and over 60 percent of their fuel wood come from common property resources. In the mixed farming systems of the country’s semi-arid regions, some three-quarters of people depend on the commons for grazing. Nationwide, the India-based NGO Foundation for Ecological Security (FES) estimates that the commons contribute up to US$5 billion to poor rural households. And, with investment and proper management, the organisation believes the commons could supply a quarter of the country’s fodder needs. These commons also perform important ecological functions, providing habitats for wildlife, harbouring rainwater and absorbing greenhouse gases.

For whose benefit?

India’s common lands have been under threat for at least the past half-century, with between 25-50 per cent already lost due to population pressure and increasing degradation. Little wonder the proposed jatropha plantations are contentious. “By pursuing the energy security of the few - the middle classes and the rich - we are compromising the livelihood security of the poor,” laments Subrata Singh of FES.

The government has tried to find a win-win solution. In an attempt to help the poor share the rewards of the country’s anticipated biofuel boom, the expansion of jatropha production is taking place through the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (NREGS). Under proposed plans, local communities will be paid to plant, tend and harvest the crop on common land. But critics argue that once jatropha is in the ground, livelihoods will become irrevocably tied to the productivity of the crop and the stability of its market price.

While jatropha supporters point to the crop’s near-magical ability to tolerate harsh, drought-like conditions, others have suggested that official estimates of its productivity on suboptimal land have been exaggerated. If the crop fails to live up to expectations the poor will have traded access to precious land in return for neither food, fodder, fuel, medicine - nor a source of income. “Eventually, planting these areas with biofuels might force people from the land,” continues Singh. “We are concerned they might become ecological refugees and migrate to urban areas for their livelihoods.”

Jatropha farming on common land has begun in Andhra Pradesh. (Photo: WREN Media)

FES has been working with state governments to help communities achieve legal recognition for the wasteland commons. It has already assisted communities in six states to establish long-term leases over the areas they depend on and is promoting investment in land restoration through the NREGS. The organisation is also working with the South Asia Pro-Poor Livestock Programme to document the value of the commons to poor livestock keepers, to protect the land and to help other communities diversify into animal husbandry.

Despite progress in these areas, India is simply too large for FES to protect all the affected communities and jatropha plantations have already swallowed-up pockets of common land. Significantly, in the same month that the government unveiled its new biofuels target, state-run refinery Bharat Petroleum announced plans to invest US$480 million in jatropha production. The race for ‘wasteland’ is well underway.

This report originally appeared on the website of The New Agriculturalist and is republished here with permission.

Rugged microbes equipped with a unique set of survival skills find high-temperature and acidic conditions a welcome home. And scientists have a peculiar fondness for these “extremeophiles,” freaks of nature that live outside the boundaries of normal existence. These are bugs that can grow in the harshest of conditions, from sulphuric acid to high-salt environments.

Part of the reason scientists are interested is extremeophiles potential to be put to work to produce next-generation cellulosic-based biofuels.

Sandia’s Rajat Sapra examines assays for the screening of engineered enzymes. (Photo: Sandia National Labs)

How? These microbes can perform feats that bioengineers till now only dreamed of. They offer, perhaps, the best hope to tear down rigid plant material without using specialized chemicals or high amounts of energy and, perhaps, one day to create new fuels to power autos and trucks. Scientists and engineers at Sandia National Labs are taking the lead in the effort.

“We are looking at extremeophiles that can thrive in high temperature and acidic conditions,” said Rajat Sapra, staff scientist and engineer with Sandia National Labs. “Bugs that can grow in sulphuric acid are of great importance because nature has already done all of the genetic customization and adaption. It saves scientists trying to create superbugs with these modified capabilities.”

Over the course of the next few years, Sandia scientists are planning on working with the three different parts of the cellulosic biofuel process, which include deconstruction technologies for breaking down cellulosic materials and engineering extremeophiles for pretreatment processes.

“What we look at in terms of processes is trying to streamline these extremeophiles,” says Sapra. “If you look at stonewashed jeans, that process is achieved through the use of a bacterial extremeophile.”

The world of biofuels and cellulosic ethanol comes down to a pretty simple equation. Cellulosic sugars are based on six carbon sugars, which is common among plants. The longer the length of the carbon chains, the more energy density is stored inside the plant material. The researchers explain energy density with a simple equation of one gallon of ethanol having the same energy density as 0.6 gallons of gasoline.

Trouble is all of that energy density is locked up pretty snugly in the cellulose and lignin materials of plant, which means you have to pay an energy or chemical cost to break it down to get at the rich density of energy. It isn’t the challenge of converting sugars to ethanol, it is how to break down the plant material into a mulch that can then provide sugars.

Sometimes missing from the big discussions about biofuel processing is the energy cost of getting the foodstuffs to the place where the fuel is going to be refined. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, for example, to transport large volumes of poplar trees from one region to another by truck.

That’s why scientists like Sapra are clear about the real Achilles’ heel for making biofuels economic and scalable. It comes down to looking at the entire process as an integrated one. And the key focus is taking into account the enormous scale of the process.

At the end of the day, the real answer for sustainable, economically viable biofuels resides in grasses and woody plants, instead of food crops. Agricultural waste is a starting point. Growing and extracting for corn stover and rice straw is all about converting waste plant material that would otherwise be burned into a high-energy-density material from which ethanol can be processed and refined.

There are three basic steps in biofuel production. First is taking the biomass and breaking it down. Second is deconstructing the material into polymers. Third is converting the sugars into fuels.

Researchers and engineers are focused on the goal of taking the entire conversion of biomass material into sugars and ethanol and doing it in one large vat or container. This is called consolidated bioprocessing and has obvious advantages over other approaches in both economics and efficiency.

Even though second-generation biofuels are still years off, the ability to harness the mysterious ways by which nature has solved extremeophiles’ problems of survival is surely going to be a boon to efficient fuel production. — Lee Bruno