ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Energy prizes re-energized

Posted: Monday, January 22, 2007 9:05 PM by Alan Boyle

As President Bush prepares a renewed "State of the Union" push to break America's addiction to oil, lawmakers and industry types are redoubling efforts to create multimillion-dollar prizes for automotive energy alternatives.

Like Bush's own Advanced Energy Initiative, which was announced during last year's State of the Union address, the prize initiatives made some progress last year but didn't quite hit the lofty goals that were originally set:

  • The Automotive X Prize, established by the same folks who awarded $10 million for the first private-sector spaceflights back in 2004, would reward innovations in auto energy efficiency. Organizers had hoped to unveil the program and start signing up competitors last year, but they're still in talks with a potential title sponsor. "I don't want to predict when we'll be done talking," said Lane Soelberg, vice president of marketing and partners for the X Prize Foundation.
  • The H-Prize would be a federally backed competition to encourage breakthroughs in hydrogen fuel systems, ranging from fuel-cell-powered cars to the infrastructure required to keep them on the road. Legislation to authorize prizes of up to $10 million sailed through the House on a 416-6 vote last year, but fizzled out in the Senate. Today the sponsors of the bill - Reps. Bob Inglis, R-S.C., and Dan Lipinski, D-Ill. - announced that the bill would be refiled on Tuesday.

Some folks might say one of the world's largest industries shouldn't need a multimillion-dollar prize, whether privately or federally funded, to pursue technologies that could lead to multibillion-dollar profits. But Soelberg said prizes can provide an extra push, particularly for innovators who may be flying under the big automakers' radar.

"If you're going to make a major difference in the industry, sooner or later the industry leaders are going to be involved. ... If [a technology] has teeth and can actually get picked up, why not be the people who make it possible to bring it to market?" he told me today.

The X Prize Foundation was able to kick-start new approaches to spaceflight with a $10 million prize, backed by a down payment from the Ansari family. That $10 million figure also surfaced when the foundation announced a genetics prize last year. However, Soelberg said $10 million wouldn't be enough of an enticement for the automotive competition.

"It's fair to say that the prize would most likely need to be larger than prizes we've launched in the past," he said.

Soelberg promised that the contest would not be "biased toward one particular fuel or technology" - be it hydrogen or ethanol, biodiesel or plug-in hybrid, or even a more efficient gasoline-burner. The winning car would have to put in a performance equivalent of 100 miles per gallon of gasoline, but it would also have to be "something that is marketable and has demand," he said.

"It needs to be more than a stripped-down commuter car with a couple of fuel cells," he said. That's not to say the contest will force all the competitors into a one-size-fits-all standard, however. Soelberg said different competition classes would likely be established for alternative concept cars as well as standard four-passenger vehicles.

Although the rules still have to be set, competitors would be required to pass through "very specific benchmark goals and gates," culminating in an actual road rally, Soelberg said. The plan is to unveil the prize program this year, although the precise timing depends on how quickly the sponsorship talks wind up, he said.

The same fuzzy schedule applies to the H-Prize program: Last year, the enabling legislation was fast-tracked through the House but died when the clock ran out in the Senate. This session, the bill's backers are starting earlier, with the enthusiasm over alternative energy driving them forward like a jolt of wind-generated electricity.

"Moving to a hydrogen economy is the ultimate triple play with perfect alignment between the local and national interest," Inglis said in today's news release. "We can create jobs, clean up the air and make America more secure by breaking dependence on Middle Eastern oil."

The 10-year program would set aside up to $70 million in federal funds, with the hope that another $40 million would come from private capital. Here's how the figures break down:

  • Technological advancements: Four prizes of up to $1 million would be awarded every other year in the categories of hydrogen production, storage, distribution and utilization.
  • Prototypes: One prize of up to $4 million would be awarded every other year for prototype hydrogen-powered vehicles that meet performance goals.
  • Transformational technologies: One grand prize of up to $10 million in federal funds, supplemented by up to $40 million in private funds, would be awarded for "development of wells-to-wheels breakthrough technologies."

Another $2 million would be budgeted annually for administrative and advertising costs. Following the X Prize formula, the H-Prize program would be administered on the Energy Department's behalf by a private, nonprofit organization.

"The goal of the prize is to develop the most nongovernmental way to break through to a hydrogen economy," Inglis said. "We want to harness the power of the American 'can do' spirit and innate human competitive drive."

Of course, hydrogen is considered an energy carrier rather than an energy source. (Seen any hydrogen mines lately?) But some researchers have concluded that a wind-hydrogen energy economy makes the most sense in the long haul - and such a system is being put to the test right now in Norway.

The problem usually comes in converting from the old way of doing things to something new - and if a prize can somehow change the short-term economic equation and give a push to that process, so much the better. But it has to be the right kind of prize.

How would you structure a prize to encourage energy independence and efficiency while saving the world? Feel free to add your ideas below.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Well, we can build all the energy efficient cars we want but nothing beats self-sufficient communal homes with things like sub-industrial-scale workshops and professionally-equipped offices that can allow us to work 'productively' right from our own homes!  No lost commuting time, no daycare services needed, far less vehicle expenditures and less impact on the environment...  Our communities also need smaller footprints and more jobs right where people live.  The fact that there isn't makes me wonder who wrote local building codes to prevent it?

Hydrogen and ethanol are only temporary solutions until ultra-efficient battery technology replaces the need for any portable fuel at all.  We're best off powering our own cars from the solar and wind generators of our own homes!
It's funny that you should mention ultra-efficient batteries, Chris ... I was just catching up with this article from the MIT Technology Review about ultra-efficient batteries:

http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/18086
Holy Hannah Alan…! I started to get goose bumps reading: "Pound for pound, it will also pack 10 times the punch of lead-acid batteries (2.3 x lithium-ion) at half the cost and without the need for toxic materials or chemicals.” "By some estimates, it would only require $9 worth of electricity for an EESU-powered vehicle to travel 500 miles…" A game-changer to say the least! The charge time of only 10 minutes was for a small battery but still… Safe, better able to regenerate just using brakes, little degredation over the life of the car. The article even seemed to hint that more performance was possible in the future! Sure hope they can overcome the 'possible' minimum temp. (–20C) and longevity issues if indeed it has those problems as was 'speculated!' I'm blown away to say the least!
Alan - the EEStor battery seems to be a step in the right direction. Can the nano-battery be far behind? Will anything be produced in time to contend with global warming? We need something right now to produce enough Oxygen to balance out our over-dependence on Carbon Dioxide emissions.
To this point in time electromagnetic energy is not fully understood because till his mathematics were developed there was no way to completely map the reality ; once the technological manifestation occurs George Jetson will be real so to speak . + Time is linear, space is curved + Cheers from the author of the Mathematics of Peace
Hydrogen fuel cells is a battery technology. Let's not get confused on this important issue. Hydrogen is not a source of energy. In fact, a hydrogen fuel cell is just a battery that can be recharged by  refueling with hydrogen. I know that sounds like a Microsoft Help page, but it's the truth.

Fuel cells are just a convenient way to power cars with coal or nuclear energy. Much more to the point would be a prize to discover a means of producing free radical hydrogen that actually has a smaller carbon foot-print than a present-day gas burner.

If all you want to do is solve the political problem of buying oil from people who hate us, then by all means, burn coal to produce electricity to produce hydrogen. If, however, you want to solve the greenhouse gas problem, then hydrogen is not a solution.
Our infrastructures are built around the automobile... This is the fundamental problem! Chris E above nails it on the head!
My favorite is still space-based solar. We have more energy streaming past us than we could possibly use, even if we were to raise the whole world population to a standard of living far better than the richest people in the US now enjoy. --MarkusQ
The most under reported, and therefore, the best kept secret of all these alternative energy sources in Anhydrous Ammonia; NH3.  This energy carrier has physical properties much like those of Propane and has a better (recoverable) energy density.  Furthermore, it will burn in a standard off the end of the manufacturer's production line engine.  Of course, the fuel admission system and the ECM require modification but this is simply and inexpensively done.

Will it work or is this just another unsubstantiated pie in the sky proposal?  Of course it works!  We have been driving such an Ammonia fueled vehicle for more then three years!

Think of this; this vehicle meets the California clean air requirements for 2009 right now!

Cheers,
Don Gillespie
Hi Alan,

I like these X-prize type projects much better than a lot of traditional programs (SBIRs for instance) because their benefits are twofold.  

First, there is the "inventive incentive" to solve a technical problem in exchange for a cash prize.  Second, and just as important, is that the projects generate so much excitement that they also cultivate the market's receptivity to winning technologies.

We get a solved problem and a high probability of market adoption.  That's what I call a beautiful thing.

EEStor's ultracapacitor technology was featured in a Business 2.0 article last year, and mentioned a patent (#7033406, for your perusal).  I hope it pans out, but it won't if they can't keep the cost and weight down to their claims; otherwise, ultracapacitors have been around for quite a while actually.

I'm still waiting to see a $10 million + prize to make it worth my while to enter the fray.  Until then, the world is "just gonna hafta" wait to see my integrated Buckminsterfulleresque solution to the energy/housing/agriculture/water/waste management problem...assuming I have one.

Keep safe,
Patrick Bishop

We need a real energy policy that does an overall energy balance from cradle to grave so we don't waste time and resources debating the technologies that make no sense.  Once we do this, it will clearly show that for the next 100 years, ethanol and hydrogen powered cars make no sense.

Ethanol consumes more energy then it makes. And where do you get the H2 from?  From oil, water is not an option unless you build lots of nuclear power plants to produce H2 from water. An overall energy balance will show that it is less effecient to produce and burn H2 than burning gasoline direct.  Electric cars are even less efficient and pollute more then current gasoline burning cars if you use coal fired power plants as your incremental source of power which is the most likely scenario.

So what should we do?  We can make cars far lighter and far more efficient then they are now.  Using a turbine engine coupled with electric motors/generators and batteries we can nearly triple the efficiency of current cars.  Couple this with getting 1500 lbs of weight out of a car and we can build full size cars that get 60+ miles to the gallon. This addresses the issue of oil dependence and goes a long way to reducing green house gases and is a doable strategy for the next 100 years.  

We also need to revive our nuclear power program.  There are new designs that are much safer then current plants.  We needs to be built one, perfect it and then cookie cut to build several 100 others.  The only other possibility is to build the new "clean burning coal plants".  In these plants coal is not burned to CO2 it is reacted to form carbonates. If this technology is prefected and is economic, then it could replace nuclear as an option.  Either way we need to stop producing green house gasses and stop burning natural gas and coal using current technology.

While all of this is going on other longer term technologies should be pursued including fusion reactors, the super high density capacitors, solar, wind and other niche technologies.

Of course all this is for not if we don't stop reproducing and overpopulating the world and chopping down all our rain forests.  These are the most critical issues followed by a realistic energy policy that is quickly implemented.  We have been talking energy policy since 1973 and we still have nothing.  There is a real simple answer.  Get the price of gasoline up to $6-$8 per gallon and the energy efficient cars will follow.  Cars will get lighter and they will have power trains that are two to three times more efficient.  The technologies to build these cars already exist and are well understood.   They have not been implemented because of cost.  But with high gasoline prices they are very economic and could be implemented in less than 10 years. 

The idea of jumpstarting the multibillion dollar oil industry with taxpayer dollars is absurd to me.  They already receive too many public dollars in subsidies as it is. Make the market push them to reinvest their huge profits into alternative fuels.  If we as a nation of consumers refused for just one day to buy gas, actually car pool, ride a bike, or to take public transportaion, unless the oil industry moved towards alternative fuel they would have to listen or lose profit.  If we did it for a week we could make a global statement for change.

If you want to jumpstart an industry, don't allow large corporations to compete and you will be suprized with how many amazing ideas will come out of it through everyday people. Remember the Wright brothers were ordinary bike builders!  Henry Ford was a simple farmer with some good ideas!
The beauty of owning one's own home is that it frees one from the murderous impulses that arise from too close proximity to those with questionable hygiene, choices in trendy chemical amusement aids, or inferior musical tastes.  Communal living is a non-starter.

But yes, absolutely the U.S. should aggressively invest in solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and nuclear technologies.  I agree with Chris that the future of ethanol is probably limited, but the jury is still out on hygrogen.

If the U.S. were to do this, it could become the world leader in those technologies which the rest of the globe will sooner or later adopt or develop for themselves anyway.  No need to meddle in middle eastern affairs anymore.  Fewer revenues needed to fund questionable military adventures.  Less pollution.  Jobs for domestic engineers and technicians.  What's not to love?

I hate government meddling, but in this case, it will require an Eisenhower highway type project in order to build the necessary infrastructure to handle the switch from pretroleum.  The free market isn't going to do it, because the customers just aren't there in enough numbers, and they aren't there because costs are prohibitive and...there's no  infractructure, so where do you fill up in the meantime?

Rocket scientist Robert Zubrin (a guy not known for his meekness) lays out the case against hydrogen - and in favor of ethanol and methanol - in The New Atlantis:

"The Hydrogen Hoax"
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/15/zubrin.htm

Also, if you haven't seen The New Yorker article about Amory Lovins ("Mr. Green"), you might want to head over to your local library and take a look (sorry, it's not online). Lovins' main argument is that a big part of the solution must be to increase efficiency and lower energy demand (a guy after Chris Eldridge's own heart, I should think). Here's an archived article about Lovins:

"Energy guru sees oil-free world"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6492077/

Hydrogen's problem is "The Hindenburg Syndrome" followed by "The Challenger Syndrome"
My Home in Northern Nevada has no furnace. I've lived in it for more than 15 years without a frozen pipe. I do use 1 or 2 electric oil filled radiators for a brief period during cold spells. My hybrid car gets 50+MPG using technology developed last century. I say solar and electric is most economical. I wish my pockets were deeper, I'd build a car that gets at least 100MPG.
We will never get where we need to go as long as we continue to bank on exotic technologies and the greed of Big Energy. We need to break the back of the SUV-McMansion-Sprawl mentality of this country with tax and zoning policies which re-create real cities with real mass transit. The obscene tax subsidies (300 billion dollars in the last transportation bill) of the past century addicted us to the Great God Oil and his wife Infernal Combustion. It's time to put all our effort into breaking that addiction, controlling the greed merchants, and creating a truly sane lifestyle that is urban, efficient, eco-safe, and truly pacific. If we don't, Iraq will not be the last place Americans offer up the blood of their sons and daughters for oil.
Smokescreens. Wake up, people! If you believe in global warming and if you believe people cause it, then nuke is the way to go for basic energy needs. If you don't believe people cause global warming then coal is the way to go for basic energy needs. Solar doesn't work at night and wind doesn't work when there is no wind. Wake up, people! "Hydrogen" requires basic energy to manufacture it by dissociating water. It is not a "source"! It really is as simple as that.

So we are talking about two prizes, the Automotive X prize and the H prize. As Alan's link above to Robert Zubrin's paper shows, it is extremely dubious that hydrogen has anything of substance to offer. If ever you get the opportunity to listen to/read an article by a hydrogen supporter, look for these tell-tale signs:

1. Hydrogen is assumed to be the only renewable fuel out there.
2. Pro-hydrogen statements are actually arguments in favor of renewable energy. There is little or nothing that is unique to hygrogen.
3. Anyone who dares question hydrogen's feasibility is accused of being a stooge for Big Oil/status quo.

So, which prize is Congress promoting (in a rare bipartisan effort)? The one that can't work, but sounds impressive, of course!

If only there was a way of keeping Uncle Sam (and our tax dollars) out of this...

Why have we not explored geothermal energy sources more , we have a massive reactor about 3 miles down, that would provide plenty of safe, natural energy? Also what about using the power from lighting bolts from passing storms which are abundent on our planet?
Bush should be lynched in a peach tree as a traitor for stalling ethanol. If he spoke from his heart "America is addicted to oil", would he let an addict wait 20 years to remove the drug? Mandate all cars ethanol/gas now. License technology to foreign manufacturers. His Dad was a mole in the government who would rather sell drugs and guns to our enemies. They both think they're cosmopolitan diplomats. They look like cosmopolitan whores instead of honest Americans.
Jason, although I'm involved in some 'light' reading regarding photons and waves, I just caught this article on Geothermal energy:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16755646/

and YES, they are finally getting back to looking at it and think it can provide 10% of the nations energy by 2050.  Ultimately (I heard on the science channel), EXTREMELY deep geothermal (using state-of-the-art oil drilling tech) could produce something like 100,000 times earth's 'current' demands!  
The problem in common with all the solutions proffered by the writers so far is that they each require more time to develop - and spread to the "consumer" - than we actually have.  A "new" product offered by advertisers (is there any other provider?) is never new but always based upon an older, well-accepted product.  Our various writers are extrapolating new solutions out of thin air for the most part.  Only the  (horror of horrors) governments can solve the problem of global warming.  Besides, global warming is real and imminent, and it is an exponential threat, not linear.  We haven't much time left, not 2050, not 3000, not this August, as Einstein remarked about nuclear war, but soon.

The best thing we could do is find a way to split water cheaply, use the Hydrogen and release the Oxygen into the atmosphere to balance the Carbon Dioxide.  It would take decades to begin to make a difference, perhaps a century, but it took a couple of centuries to reach the imbalance we are experiencing now.
Fusion energy prize legislation was drafted 15 years ago and submitted to Congress by one of the founders of the US Tokamak program, Robert W. Bussard.  There is good reason to believe this legislative proposal was a precursor to resurgence of interest in technology prize awards later in the 1990s:

http://www.geocities.com.nyud.net:8080/
jim_bowery/BussardsLetter.html


PS: More recently, Dr. Bussard gave a talk at Google HQ about his currently favorite fusion technology and it has caused some commotion:

http://hardware.slashdot.org/
article.pl?sid=06/11/18/0616205

Alan  --  MIT has built a superconductor using nanotube technology, combining condenser and battery into a single unit.  It can use its charge slowly to power anything, including a vehicle, and can be re-charged when its power is almost gone at a 'service station' and the re-charge it as fast or faster than a 'fill-up' of gasoline.

Service stations will be able to handle more cars more quickly, more cleanly, more quietly than internal combustion engines whether or not those machines are running on partial ethanol and gasoline or some other fuel.  I rejoice. We may have time left to save ourselves and everybody else except the big oil companies.  Will they let us?


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=38371

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google