Download Free Department Of Energys Decision To Restructure The Futuregen Program Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Department Of Energys Decision To Restructure The Futuregen Program and write the review.

Discusses a recent report on the Dept. of Energy's (DoE) decision to restructure the FutureGen program. The original FutureGen plant was to capture and store underground about 90% of its CO2 emissions. Concerned about escalating costs, DoE announced in Jan. 2008 that it had decided to restructure FutureGen. DoE requested supplemental info. from restructured FutureGen applicants, which will be reviewed before any selection decision. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, known as the stimulus law, provides DoE an additional $3.4 billion for "Fossil Energy R&D." Such a substantial amount of funding could significantly impact DoE's decisions about how to move forward with programs such as FutureGen.
Coal-fired power plants generate about 1/2 of the nation's electricity and about 1/3 of its carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which contribute to climate change. In 2003, the DoE initiated FutureGen -- a commercial-scale, coal-fired power plant to incorporate integrated gasification combined cycle, an advanced generating technology, with carbon capture and storage. DoE's cost share was 74%, and industry partners agreed to fund the rest. Concerned about escalating costs, DoE restructured FutureGen. This report examines: (1) the original and restructured programs' goals; (2) similarities and differences between the new FutureGen and other DoE CCS programs; and (3) if the restructuring decision was based on sufficient info. Illus.
To deal with the climate crisis we need a new paradigm of technological and social development aimed at the restoration of ecological systems--the bio-digital energy paradigm--and China is the world power best positioned to lead this change. The climate and energy crisis requires a strong state to change the direction, speed, and scale of innovation in world capitalism. There are only a few possible contenders for catalyzing this governance of survival: China, the European Union, India, and the United States. While China is an improbable leader--and in fact the world's biggest emitter of greenhouse gasses--Peter Drahos explains in Survival Governance why this authoritarian state is actually more likely to implement systemic change swiftly and effectively than any other power. Drawing on more than 250 interviews, carried out in 17 countries--including the world's four largest carbon emitters--Drahos shows what China is doing to make its vast urban network sustainable and why all states must work toward a "bio-digital energy paradigm" based on a globalized, city-based network of innovation. As Drahos explains, America is incapable of reducing the power of its fossil fuel industry. For its part, the European Union's approach is too incremental and slowed by complex internal negotiations to address a crisis that demands a rapid response. India's capacity to be a global leader on energy innovation is questionable. To be sure, China faces hurdles too. Its coal-based industrial system is enormous, and the US, worried about losing technological superiority, is trying to slow China's development. Even so, China is currently urbanizing innovation on a historically unprecedented scale, building eco-cities, hydrogen cities, forest cities, and sponge cities (designed to cope with flooding). This has the potential to move cities into a new relationship with their surrounding ecosystems. China--given the size of its economy and the central government's ability to dictate thoroughgoing policy change--is, despite all of its flaws, presently our best hope for implementing the sort of policy overhaul that can begin to slow climate change.