Monday, February 8, 2016

Wind power and solar power are ways to reduce carbon emissions, but these generation sources are dependent on the vagaries of the weather, which means neither wind nor solar can produce electricity on-demand at all hours of the day. This variability has led many to assume that greatly expanding wind and solar to reduce carbon emissions will cause electricity costs to skyrocket and require expensive energy storage.
My colleagues and I have just published a new study to show that this assumption is not correct. In fact, if the U.S. were to move to a national 48-state electric system, rather than the regional one in place now, the country would be able to transport more renewable energy around the country. That change could reduce CO2 by 78 percent at lower costs than today without using any storage technologies.

Using a computer model, we found that this larger electric system would utilize power more efficiently regardless of the generators within it. The cost reduction between the national style system we modeled and the current one, which is divided into about 130 regions, is US$47 billion per year. That translates into an electricity cost of between 8.5 and 10.2¢ per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared to the current national average of 12.7 cents per kWh.

Tuesday, February 10, 2015


During the last five decades all people (who were sincere and honest to the nation and country and not to any boss, chair or party to fulfill their desires through nondubious and noncorrupt means) talked in their drawing rooms that this country can progress to prosperity only when a revolution takes place, a revolution by the silent hapless billion plus people of this land against all efforts of the ruling polity and bureaucracy to fool them, to loot them.

Even today as I write this a big debate is going on on all media channels wherein all the national spokes persons of all the established parties are attributing Aam Aadmi Party's win and Bhartiya Janta Party's loss to the secular credentials of one and Hindutava agenda of the latter. But let us understand that no revolution in the history of mankind has occurred with religious agenda. In fact all revolutions have taken place as a war between haves and havenots because haves have always thrived and made merry on power, authority, corruption and loots..Still they do not want to take cognizance of the fact that that it is the awareness and recognition of the plain and simple reality of today's India described in words below
Sisters and brothers of India, whether from villages or cities, from any religion, caste or creed,rich or poor, don't be taken in by any of the tricks of politicians, for end of corrupt people  and corruption will be the end of your poverty and miseries.Your poverty is a direct result of  corruption  by  those in authority and power.
which is responsible for such a clean sweep in the latest Delhi elections. In fact it is the dawn of a new era, a watershed mandate in the Indian political history where the power of ballot has rejected the hitherto effective and accepted model of Indian politics wherein the vote banks could be purchased/ goaded/fooled by empowering a few henchmen/goons economically much in the same manner as Muslim rulers would make Nawabs and British rulers would make Rai Sahibs at the expense of common man's rights and dues. The new model mooted by Aam Aadmi Party expects the Indian rulers to work for the betterment of each and every individual rather than for a few favoured and chosen ones.

Sunday, February 8, 2015

By Photo: Jeff Fusco/Getty Images
President Barack Obama is getting serious about climate change, a challenge that "poses a greater threat to future generations" than any other, he said in last week's State of the Union. In July, his administration announced an EPA regulation to slash carbon pollution from power plants. In November, he struck a pact with China on long-term emission reductions. And recently the White House unveiled a plan to cut methane emissions nearly in half by 2025.
Addressing climate change means, in large part, stepping away from dirty energy sources like coal and oil and toward cleaner sources. That’s a good thing. But it requires developing more energy elsewhere, including from one alternative source that has gotten scant attention in the mainstream press: nuclear energy, which poses its own serious environmental risks. 
The EPA’s proposed power-plant regulation provides a carbon credit to states for maintaining nuclear energy production at current levels: in other words, a carbon subsidy for maintaining the nuclear status quo. Following the release of the draft rules, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy made clear that the credit is meant, in part, to help the struggling nuclear industry. “There are a handful of nuclear facilities that, because they are having trouble remaining competitive, they haven’t yet looked at re-licensing,” she said at a roundtable discussion with business leaders in Chicago. If nuclear energy plants begin closing, she warned, “It’s a lot of carbon reduction that needs to be made up for a long period of time.”