Earth and Industry » Water

Wind Energy Returns to Its Watery Roots

Timothy Hurst — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 12:29:37 +0000

For nearly as long as people have harnessed wind to perform work, it has been used to move water from one place to another. Whether used for agricultural irrigation, wetlands drainage or pumping water from wells, wind machines have long been a relatively cheap and easy way to pump water, particularly in off-grid applications where electric alternatives are impractical or impossible. And while a handful of companies still make windpumps, little has changed in the underlying technology for nearly a century — until now. A Massachusetts company announced last week it had sold its first wind-powered water pump system in Colorado.

Worcester, Massachusetts-based Mass Megawatts has developed a wind-powered water pumping unit that it says provides a lower-cost solution when compared to traditional water pumping systems, including those powered by diesel generators.

Mass Megawatts' wind-powered water pump uses the company's patented MMW wind augmenter technology to increase the wind velocity directed at the wind turbine. By funneling the wind into narrow channels where it speeds up, the augmenter is responsible for increasing power to its turbines by an average of 70 percent.

According to the company, over three times as much power is generated by its augmenter technology compared to the production wind turbines of an equal power rating in an "un-augmented" air stream. And the technology, according to company documents, does not require the same high-demand components used in other wind turbine technologies, thereby keeping costs down.

The technology is also not limited to use as a windpump. The company is developing wind machines that generate electricity which can be stored in on-site battery banks.

The company says its technology is scalable from smaller 10 kW 'home and farm' systems to multi-megawatt utility installations and provides solutions to the two major wind project stumbling blocks: tower height and lower wind resource. But while the system may have a lower profile than many turbine technologies, the bulky framework required by the wind augmenter may still make it unpopular with some.

Mass Megawatts (OTCBB: MMMW), which began building its turbine arrays and MMW wind augmenters at a Colorado plant in late 2011, is a publicly-traded company with less than twelve million shares issued and outstanding.

Colorado OKs Toughest Fracking Fluid Rules in U.S.

Timothy Hurst — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 08:50:42 +0000

After hearing more than 11 hours of testimony in a meeting last week, Colorado regulators Tuesday approved tough new rules governing chemicals used in the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing. Also known as "fracking," hydraulic fracturing is a process whereby a slurry of water, sand and chemicals are pumped into a well at very high pressure to force natural gas out of shale rock formations. The new rules require companies to publicly disclose the chemicals—and their concentrations—found in the fracking fluid.

Meeting all day on Tuesday with environmental groups, industry representatives and other stakeholders, the nine-member Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission unanimously approved the new rules which will take effect in April 2012.

Building upon a set of rules passed by Colorado regulators in 2008 mandating disclosure of fracking chemicals to state regulators and health professionals upon request, the amended rules adopted Tuesday require operators to publish the hazardous and non-hazardous chemicals used to hydraulically fracture a well, as well as the concentrations of each chemical, to a disclosure website within 60 days of hydraulically fracturing a well.

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper commended the various parties for coming together on the disclosure rule. “These new rules give Colorado the fairest and most transparent set of fracking regulations in the country and will likely serve as a model for other states,” Hickenlooper said.

The Democrat and former geologist, Hickenlooper, has been very public about his support of hydraulic fracturing, as long as it is done in a safe and responsible manner.

"We believe oil and gas development can thrive while also meeting our high standards for protection of public health, water and the environment,” Hickenlooper said.

The oil and gas industry also supported the new framework agreed upon Tuesday.

"Colorado now has the strongest hydraulic fracturing rule in the country," said Tisha Schuller, president and CEO of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association.

"But more importantly," Schuller added, "we have gained a model process to bring together industry, environmental advocates, and regulators to ensure energy development continues in keeping with protecting the environmental resources of our state.”

The regulations are similar to those passed in Wyoming and Texas but go a step further, requiring companies to disclose the concentrations of chemicals in addition to the chemicals themselves. Eleven states have adopted or are in the process of drafting rules governing the disclosure of fracking fluids. But each state is a bit different.

Under the new Colorado rules, drillers can claim a trade secret, but they must file a form ensuring trade secret claims meet the appropriate definition, and sign an affidavit that chemicals cited qualify for trade secret protection. Even then, drillers have to publicly disclose the ingredient's chemical family. And at any time, regulators and medical professionals can obtain trade secret information upon request.

The new rule gets past what has been the biggest sticking point for fracking operators, the issue of proprietary secrecy, by striking a balance that recognizes and protects industry trade secrets so operators can maintain their competitive edge.

The actual chemical make-up of fracking fluid changes from one location to the next, based on the given area's geological characteristics. Those geologically-determined differences in the fracking fluid compounds are what drillers say they are trying to keep secret, not the harmful chemicals that have sometimes been associated with fracking operations.

Photo credits: Some rights reserved by Tim Hurst

Can Water Treatment Technology Offer the Fracking Industry a New Face?

Allison Leahy — Fri, 06 May 2011 11:31:50 +0000

Natural gas is domestically abundant (2,587 trillion cubic feet of technically recoverable natural gas in the United States) and it burns cleaner than oil and coal (30% and 50% less carbon dioxide emissions respectively), but removing the hydrocarbons from mile deep shale beds has proven to be a dangerous and environmentally damaging endeavor.

During fracking, a mixture of water, sodium, sand, heavy metals, soap, chemicals and hundreds of other components are injected into cracks in the shale bed at extremely high pressures. Breaking open the rock allows gas and other volatile organic compounds to be released. It can take 6 million gallons of this fluid to frack one well and wells may be fracked multiple times. The DOE approximates 21 billion barrels of produced water is generated each year and as we seek ways to end our dependence on foreign oil, those numbers will rise.

It's bad enough the fracking process is a massive drain on the water supply and even worse when you consider that the chemical-laden wastewater is injected into underground wells around popular fracking sites in places like Texas and Arkansas. The geology around the Marcellus Shale Formation in Pennsylvania (which holds enough natural gas to fuel the U.S. for 2 years) doesn't lend itself to this bury-and-forget technique.

Currently, flowback and produced water is taken from drill sites to nearby wastewater plants [PDF] unequipped to filter dissolved hydrocarbons, radioactive chemicals, and other volatile organic compounds. The mixture is eventually dumped into the Susquehanna and Delaware Rivers-the drinking source for tens of millions of people. Thankfully, Pennsylvania is cracking down on this practice, but they are left with the problem of what to do with all that briny fracking fluid.

The answer is Osorb, a silica (or glass) that swells eight times its size while scavenging dissolved hydrocarbons, polymers, and chemicals. The purification system, developed by ABSMaterials (with funding from the DOE) removes 99% of oil and grease, more than 90% of dissolved hydrocarbons, and "significant amounts of production chemicals".

Of two pilot-tested systems, one processed 6 gallons every hour and the other could handle 60 gallons in the same time. Not the most efficient solution, but a lot better for local residents than waking up to a cup of hot methane and lemon. The private company has announced that a 72,000 gallon per day, trailer-mounted purification system will be in use (most likely designated to Marcellus) by this summer.

As the natural gas market skyrockets, we hope more fracking sites filter flowback using Osorb's portable trailer technology, but until regulations are put in place, it is doubtful that all of the wells (1386 were drilled last year) will recover and treat their produced water with such diligence. It is simply too cheap and easy to continue pushing the produced water through municipal systems--that is, until more lawsuits pop-up.

Follow Allison Leahy on twitter or reach her by email.

Image Credits: todbaker, EIA

Judge Suspends Multi-Billion-Dollar Judgment Against Chevron in Ecuador Pollution Case

Allison Leahy — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 07:10:37 +0000

Litigation feuds rage on between Ecuador, Chevron and PetroEcuador (the state-owned oil company). In an unusual decision, U.S. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan ordered the $113 billion indemnity case suspended for 28 days due to suspicion of foul play (read: racketeering) by US lawyers representing some 30,000 Ecuadorians. The $113 billion claim is twice the GDP of Ecuador and follows a 2008 demand for $27 billion in damages. The case was first filed in 1993 and is expected to reach its close later this year.

TexPet (bought by Chevron in 2001) broke ground in the Amazon basin in 1964. They built the infrastructure and operated the production facility (which would be illegal by US standards) for 26 years after that. The company has admitted to dumping more than 16 billion gallons of chemical-laden "water of formation" into the only source of drinking water (some reports estimate this closer to 30 billion gallons--compare with 10.8 million gallons dumped by the Exxon Valdez). PetroEcuador gained complete ownership of the toxifying technology when Texaco left Ecuador in 1992. PetroEcuador facilities are responsible for over 1,000 recorded spills.

In an open letter to Ecuador, Chevron offered an explanation as to why TexPet should be exonerated and why "all remaining environmental and social conditions in the region are the sole legal responsibility of PetroEcuador and the Ecuadorian government."

Aching with petroleum pains, the Amazon basin lives on, unprotected from the pollution caused by 40 years of exploration, excavation and extraction in the Amazon basin. Texaco's has paid a $40 million remediation, most of which likely went to patching unlined seepage holes; it has not eased the suffering of those afflicted with skin rashes, itchy noses, sore throats, headaches, red eyes, diarrhea and gastritis--worse when the rains wash toxic waste out of the unlined pits. The communities of the basin are also experiencing higher rates of miscarriage and various cancers.

Is it time for the Ecuadorian government to face the legacy of the industry that makes up 50% of its export earnings? Does Chevron still have responsibility to the region?

These questions may remain unanswered for months to come as Chevron is expected to ask for (and the Kaplan will most likely grant) more time.

IMAGE CREDITS: Peter Tan, Amazona Ochrocephala via flickr.
Reach Allison Leahy on twitter and through email.

Making Market-Based Solutions, Green Solutions at CGI

Maria Surma Manka — Thu, 23 Sep 2010 02:45:03 +0000

Clinton Global Initiative: Markets as problem-solvers... with the chance of total failure

Here in the U.S., we hear the term "market-based solutions" often in the context of climate change, when we talk about economic tools like a carbon tax or cap-and-trade scheme to reduce pollution. But there are tons of examples of this approach being applied to issues all over the world. And today at the Clinton Global Initiative, there was plenty of discussion of what works, what doesn't, and why we need to embrace the possibility of failure.

Lotus Foods reported back on a commitment the company made at the 2008 CGI annual meeting to introduce to the U.S. food trade 3-5 sustainably grown rices by 2012. By the company's model, sustainably grown rice is grown using SRI methods. SRI is the System of Rice Intensification (I was ignorant of SRI until today, but after some research I've learned this is a big deal in agriculture and the developing world). In short, SRI methods give farmers the tools they need to increase their yields, use less seed, less water (rice farming uses 1/4 - 1/3 of the earth's freshwater reserves annually), and no agri-chemicals. Today, Lotus Foods reported that they are on their way to meeting that 2008 commitment and have connected thousands of family farmers in Africa and Asia with profitable food markets in the U.S. (consumers can find Lotus rice at Whole Foods, for example). Bottom line: Farmers have increased their incomes 25 percent, American consumers have access to healthy, organic and sustainable rice choices, and both groups are addressing problems like food security, climate change, and water scarcity.

These are the kind of solutions that really get me excited - the kind where nobody needs to be "convinced" of anything, but where the solution benefits both the producer and end-user immensely and tackles other global problems.

But how do you know when an idea for a solution is a good one? Do you just know it when you see it? Or only once it succeeds? New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman opined that market-based solutions must have two characteristics in order to survive: 1) They must be scalable (if not, then they're just a hobby); 2) They must be sustainable (they cannot live and die on government funding).

It was within this context that Leila Chirayath Janah, founder of an organization called Samasource that connects those in the developing world with basic online job opportunities, made an interesting point that too many non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are afraid to fail. This leads to not enough risk-taking, which means innovation and solutions are moving fast enough, which means the world is left with lots of inefficient work that isn't having an impact. NGOs should start adopting what successful entrepreneurs do when implementing market-based solutions: Measuring their impact soliciting feedback.

In my experience, there is a growing awareness among NGOs that measuring success is critical for continued funding and, of course, as justification to the membership for continued dollars. So as we tackle more environment problems with market-based solutions and collaborative partnerships, NGOs are actually in a great position to learn about business best-practices (i.e. measurement and feedback) that could be shaped and adopted for their own use. And, knowing when to call it quits. "We have to get more comfortable with the idea of failure in the social impact sector," said Janah, in order to make way for those organizations with the best solutions that are having the greatest impact most efficiently.

PHOTO: Lucas Jackson/Reuters via PicApp

Imagine H2O Launches ‘X-Prize’ for Water Innovation

Timothy Hurst — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 19:50:07 +0000

$100,000 prize for water startups that save energy

Water. Most Americans think nothing of it. Turn on the faucet and we expect clean water to flow under good pressure at the temperature of our choosing. But to make all that happen, water requires energy and lots of it. A full 3 percent of electrical power generation is used to treat, pump and distribute water in the U.S. (to say nothing of heating it). And in California, that figure is as high as 19 percent.

Imagine H2O is turning the concern about the intersection of energy and water into an opportunity by opening a $100,000 global competition to find the world’s most promising water businesses that save energy.

Innovations could focus on a number of areas including water heating/cooling, pumping and transport or low-energy treatment. Entries for this year's competition, The Water-Energy Nexus, will be accepted beginning today, September 1, through November 15, 2010.

“Opportunities for saving energy exist at every stage of the water cycle,” says Scott Bryan, Director of Operations at Imagine H2O. “Many of these innovations could be attractive to all water users from utilities down to the individual consumer.”

Imagine H2O is a non-profit company created in 2008 "to inspire and help bring to market sustainable solutions to global water problems through entrepreneurship." The Water-Energy Nexus is the second contest Imagine H2O has held for water innovation. The 2009 contest, Water Efficiency, rewarded business plans that offered the greatest promise of breakthroughs in the efficient use and supply of water in agriculture, commercial, industrial or residential applications.

Like last year, this year’s $100,000 purse includes cash as well as access to the Imagine H2O Incubator Program that helps bring the winning ideas to market. Business incubators have the ability to not only provide seed money and in-kind support for startups, they can also be pivotal in bringing products to market.

“This prize highlights a big market opportunity for entrepreneurs,” says Tamin Pechet, Imagine H2O’s Chairman. “Tomorrow's water supply system will have to be an energy-efficient one.”

Photo: Some rights reserved by Chris Happel

Colorado Businessman Proposes 560-Mile Water Pipeline from Wyoming

Timothy Hurst — Mon, 03 May 2010 18:59:20 +0000

The Flaming Gorge Reservoir in southwestern Wyoming (Photo: lowjumpingfrog)

A proposed pipeline carrying water 560 miles from Wyoming to Colorado would likely take the pressure off farmers and municipalities on the growing front range... but at what price?

[I originally published a version of this article at Celsias in August 2009. -TH]

Colorado's population is expected to double by 2050, when 10 million people will call the state home. According to some estimates, that growth will likely require an additional one million acre-feet of water per year.

The problem, in terms of long-term water planning, is that roughly ninety percent of Coloradoans live east of the Continental Divide, while about 75 percent of water falls on the Western Slope. But relatively little of that Western Slope water is unspoken for, and making any more claims on it would put enormous pressure on upstream riparian habitats and downstream agricultural producers alike. It's a different story to the north in Wyoming, however, where unappropriated water still runs fast and strong in the Green River.

And that's where Aaron Million comes in.

The Colorado rancher-turned-entrepreneur has proposed a plan to export up to 250,000 acre feet of water per year from the Green River, 560 miles to the south, to the growing cities along Colorado's front range. Million hatched the plan in 2003, right around the time he and I took a graduate seminar in environmental politics together. I saw Aaron on and off for the next few years on the campus at Colorado State University in Fort Collins, and I knew he had a plan for some water project, but for some reason I didn't think he was that serious about it. I was wrong.

A man with a big plan

An avid fly-fisherman, and a bit of a free market environmentalist, the Boulder-raised Million is not your run-of-the-mill rancher. Nor is his, a run-of-the-mill plan.

Million developed the idea of the project while working on his PhD in Resource Economics at Colorado State University in Fort Collins. But when he spoke of the plan then, it seemed, to me at least, little more than a pipe dream. Today, however, the Army Corps of Engineers is preparing an Environmental Impact Study of the proposal, a proposal that could take the pinch off Colorado farmers and municipalities alike.

Below the Flaming Gorge Reservoir, the Green River hooks out of Utah then loops briefly through Colorado before swinging back into Utah. Million wants to take advantage of Colorado’s remaining entitlement under the 1922 Colorado River Compact, saying about his 2003 epiphany, "I knew the Green River was a legal tributary of the Colorado River mainstream that would allow for a legal filing and appropriation of the water for the state."

The Colorado Water Conservation Board estimates the state has 440,000-1.4 million acre-feet of water to develop under the compact.

The pipeline would carry unclaimed Green River water from near Wyoming's southwestern border with Utah, eastward, alongside the Interstate 80 corridor and across the Continental Divide, which is only about 7,000 feet at that crossing. From there, the pipeline would head down into Laramie and turn southward, pointing toward several reservoirs on the Colorado Front Range

Sixteen pumping stations powered by locally abundant natural gas would be situated along the 560 mile route.(Continued...)