Washington’s blog sums up the current situation fairly neatly when he writes:
“The Gulf oil spill disaster must not be in vain. We must use it to finally find the vision and the will to make the switch to alternative energy.”

Article in full:

“As Robert Redford writes this week:

Thursday, May 20, 2010, marks one month since BP’s oil rig exploded in the Gulf Coast ….This is the clearest picture we could have of our failed national energy policy — which extends over many decades and administrations.

And if Alan Greenspan, John McCain, George W. Bush, Sarah Palin and others are right, the costs of that failed energy policy might be even higher.

Many still believe that alternative energy is an expensive, unrealistic pipe dream.

But that is no longer true.

As I have previously pointed out:

One of the world’s leading experts on trend forecasting says that producing our own energy for our homes and cars (called “micro generation”) will become a huge trend in the next couple of decades.

What’s he talking about?

Well, energy and food prices will keep going up. Every dollar we don’t have to pay to the energy utility or food producers is a dollar we get to keep. And the technology for producing it ourselves is getting better and better.

So increasingly over the next couple of decades, we will generate our own energy and food.

Due to high oil prices, major breakthroughs in energy production are happening every day.

For example:

• A scientist has figured out how to make and store energy by splitting water with sunlight. He says: “You’ve made your house into a fuel station [and we can get] rid of all the … grids”

• A new generation of highly-efficient wind turbines (and see this) is being introduced which can produce much more energy

• And new approaches to solar energy [see below] are making residential solar very cost-competitive

• It has been discovered that alcohol made from donuts, grass and other abundant materials can run cars and all other engines [see below]

With recent breakthroughs, individuals can now generate enough energy to get off the grid and power their own homes. Indeed, some companies will even provide the equipment for you (and see this).

Indeed, an new government study shows that North Sea wind and wave power could make Britain the “Saudi Arabia of renewable energy“. For more on microgeneration and solar energy breakthroughs, see this, this, this and this.

Moreover, Japan and other countries are funding large-scale projects to place solar collectors in orbit, and then send clean energy to Earth.

And as I’ve written before, alcohol has more alternative energy applications than you might know:

There’s a secret history regarding alcohol that you won’t hear on the six o’clock news:

• Cars and everything else running on internal combustion engines can run on alcohol at least as well as they can run on gasoline. Indeed, engines were built back in 1870 that could run using either alcohol or gasoline

• A New York Times article from 1908 (and here) enthusiastically states:

“Autoists Discuss Alcohol As Fuel; Great Future Ahead For Use In Commercial Wagons, Says Prof. Lucke. Tests With Motor Truck E.R. Hewitt Tells Engineers Of His Results With Gasoline And Alcohol In Same Engine”

• Henry Ford said that alcohol was “a cleaner, nicer, better fuel for automobiles than gasoline” (James Brough, The Ford Dynasty: An American Story, p. 118, and cited in “Ford – The Men and the Machine”, p. 365). The Model T Ford had a knob right on the dashboard to adjust the fuel-air mixture for either alcohol or gas

• Alcohol does not corrode or shorten the lifespan of modern cars, and an inexpensive adjustment to regular cars will make them run smoothly and inexpensively on alcohol

Moreover, those in the know actually are using alcohol as a fuel today. For example, there are many millions of cars being driven in Brazil that run on alcohol.

And many government and car fleets are actually required to be able to run on either alcohol or gas. The car companies simply forgot to tell the American consumer that these kind of cars are available. See this and this.

Indeed, as I’ve previously noted, running equipment using alcohol should not increase food prices:

The leading proponents of alcohol as fuel are not talking about corn. Corn is a lousy crop for making alcohol, and there are many other crops that are much more efficient. Indeed, the leaders in this field promote growing a wide variety of crops (appropriate for whatever specific climate you live in) , and many of the crops they suggest are also valuable food crops.

And you don’t even need to use plants . . . you can make alcohol fuel out of rotten fruit, stale soft drinks or donuts.

And see this and this

And as I pointed out last year:

Heat can be used to generate electricity. This is true not only on the industrial scale, but even on the level of your home faucet. Indeed, inventors have already built home faucet kits which turn the unused heat from your hot water into electricity.

In hot climates, black thermal-electric mats could be installed on roofs to generate electricity.

Heat is a byproduct of other processes, and so nothing special needs to be done to create it. Just about every human activity and many natural processes create heat, so we just have to utilize it.

Another use of a free, wasted byproduct to generate electricity is piezo-electric energy. “Piezo” means pressure. Anything that produces pressure can produce energy.
For example, a train station in Japan installed piezo-electric equipment in the ground, so that the foot traffic of those walking through the train station generates electricity (turnstiles at train, subway and ferry stations, ballparks and amusement parks can also generate electricity).

Similarly, all exercise machines at the gym or at home can be hooked up to produce electricity.

But perhaps the greatest untapped sources of piezo-electric energy are freeways and busy roads. If piezo-electric mats were installed under the busiest sections, the thousands of tons of vehicles passing over each day would generate massive amounts of electricity for the city’s use.

***

Scientists have figured out that solar collection is much more efficient if you focus the sunlight:

And see this.

One day, virtually every surface will be turned into an energy-production medium. Instead of having discreet energy-producing machines, roofs, exterior walls, sidewalks, roads and many other surfaces will be coated with “smart materials” which convert light, heat, pressure and other inputs into useful energy, which are then collected, stored and distributed as needed.

Hundreds or thousands of years in the future, mankind might even learn how to collect the virtual particles which are constantly popping into and out of existence.

Harvesting The Ocean of Energy
Perhaps the biggest evolution needed in people’s thinking – in any area of life – is how we think about energy.

The current paradigm is that energy is produced expensively by governments or large corporations through gigantic projects using enormous amounts of money, materials and manpower. Because energy can only be produced by the big boys, we the people must bow our heads to the powers-that-be. We must pay a lot of our hard-earned money to buy electricity from them, and we can’t question the methods or results of their energy production.

Our life will become much better when we begin to understand that energy is all around us – as an ocean of electromagnetic forces and as a byproduct of other processes in the form of heat, pressure, etc. – and all we need do is learn how to harvest it.

The Gulf oil spill disaster must not be in vain.

We must use it to finally find the vision and the will to make the switch to alternative energy.”

The American Southwest has some of the greatest solar resources on the globe, it yet remains largely untapped. This trend may be changing as solar technology matures, market forces shift and concern for climate change mounts.

One of the most common arguments against large-scale use of renewable energy is that it cannot produce a steady, reliable stream of energy, day and night. Ausra Inc. does not agree. They believe that solar thermal technology has the potential to supply over 90% of grid power, while finding solutions to environmental issues.

“The U.S. could nearly eliminate our dependence on coal, oil and gas for electricity and transportation, drastically slashing global warming pollution without increasing costs for energy,” said David Mills, chief scientific officer and founder of Ausra.

You may be wondering, how will we have electricity at night or during cloudy weather if solar power is generating a majority of our electricity? Will we use large banks of batteries or burn candles?

Solar Thermal with Storage Capacity The ability to utilize solar thermal technology after the sun sets is made possible by a storage system that is up to 93% efficient, according to Ausra’s executive vice president John O’Donnell.

High efficiency is achieved because solar thermal plants do not need to convert energy to another form in order to store it and do not rely on battery technology. Flat moving reflectors or parabolic troughs focus solar energy to generate heat. This heat generates steam that turns turbines, thus generating an electric current.

If you want to generate electricity at 3 am, heat from the sun can be stored for later use. This gives solar thermal technology the ability to not just produce peak power, but also generate base load electricity.

Heat storage is not a new technology, having been used for plastic manufacturing and petroleum production for a long time. Solar thermal plants have a cost advantage compared to photovoltaic technology because energy can be stored as heat without being converted to another form or relying on batteries.

“My favorite example in comparing energy storage options is on your desktop,” said John O’Donnell. “If you have a laptop computer and a thermos of coffee on your desk, the battery in your laptop and the thermos store about the same amount of energy. One of them costs about $150 and the other one costs maybe $3 to $5. On the wholesale level, storing electric power is at least 100 times more expensive than storing heat.” ausra%20aerial%20plant.jpg Peak Power: Low Hanging Fruit for Solar Thermal Energy The maximum amount of electricity demand on the power grid occurs during weekday afternoons and evenings in the summer months in most regions of the United States. This is largely caused by air conditioning loads, which gobble up electricity. Solar energy availability however starts to drop in the late afternoon, before peak load has started to wane.

Because the electric grid needs to be able to handle these peak loads, capacity is built to specifically handle these loads. Natural gas typically comes to the rescue to produce this electricity. Although these plants are expensive to operate, they are cheaper to construct than most of the alternatives. They are fast to start, producing power in 30 minutes or less.

Additional power plants are constructed just to generate electricity for the times when it is needed most. This causes peak electricity to be more expensive. A kilowatt hour of electricity at 3 pm and 3 am does not come with the same price tag to the utility company.

Now add the uncertainty of the price of natural gas. “No utility can tell you what the cost of power will be from a gas plant, five or ten years from now,” said Frederick Morse, senior advisor for the U.S., Abengoa Solar. “From a solar plant, the price is fixed. There is no fuel component to alter it.”

This is where solar energy can truly shine. “Adding solar plants that reliably generate until 10 pm displaces the highest cost alternative power,” said John O’Donnell. “That is the first wave of solar thermal plants. The daily and seasonal variation in grid load in the United States matches solar availability.”

Due to cost, infrastructure and technology hurdles, it will be a while until we see solar energy generating large-scale base load capacity, thus replacing nuclear and coal power plants. Some of the factors that will push this along are a strong national high voltage transmission system, solar technology advances, high fossil fuel costs, a longer-term extension of the commercial solar tax credit, and a carbon tax.

http://www.triplepundit.com/pages/solar-thermal-electricity-catc-002978.php

The University of New South Wales’ ARC Photovoltaic Centre of Excellence has reported the first silicon solar cell to achieve the milestone of 25 per cent efficiency.

The UNSW ARC Photovoltaic Centre of Excellence already held the world record of 24.7 per cent for silicon solar cell efficiency. Now a revision of the international standard by which solar cells are measured, has delivered the significant 25 per cent record to the team led by Professors Martin Green and Stuart Wenham and widened their lead on the rest of the world.

Centre Executive Research Director, Scientia Professor Martin Green, said the new world mark in converting incident sunlight into electricity was one of six new world records claimed by UNSW for its silicon solar technologies.

Professor Green said the jump in performance leading to the milestone resulted from new knowledge about the composition of sunlight.

“Since the weights of the colours in sunlight change during the day, solar cells are measured under a standard colour spectrum defined under typical operational meteorological conditions,” he said.

“Improvements in understanding atmospheric effects upon the colour content of sunlight led to a revision of the standard spectrum in April. The new spectrum has a higher energy content both down the blue end of the spectrum and at the opposite red end with, dare I say it, relatively less green.”

The recalibration of the international standard, done by the International Electrochemical Commission in April, gave the biggest boost to UNSW technology while the measured efficiency of others made lesser gains. UNSW’s world-leading silicon cell is now six per cent more efficient than the next-best technology, Professor Green said. The new record also inches the UNSW team closer to the 29 per cent theoretical maximum efficiency possible for first-generation silicon photovoltaic cells.

Dr Anita Ho-Baillie, who heads the Centre’s high efficiency cell research effort, said the UNSW technology benefited greatly from the new spectrum “because our cells push the boundaries of response into the extremities of the spectrum”.

“Blue light is absorbed strongly, very close to the cell surface where we go to great pains to make sure it is not wasted. Just the opposite, the red light is only weakly absorbed and we have to use special design features to trap it into the cell,” she said.

Professor Green said: “These light-trapping features make our cells act as if they were much thicker than they are. This already has had an important spin-off in allowing us to work with CSG Solar to develop commercial ‘thin-film’ silicon-on-glass solar cells that are over 100 times thinner than conventional silicon cells.”

ARC Centre Director, Professor Stuart Wenham said the focus of the Centre is now improving mainstream production.

“Our main efforts now are focussed on getting these efficiency improvements into commercial production,” he said.

“Production compatible versions of our high efficiency technology are being introduced into production as we speak.”
http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20082410-18340-2.html

By turning a long line of mirrors, the first solar thermal plant in nearly two decades was launched last week in Bakersfield, California. Unlike solar photovoltaic systems that convert sunlight into electricity, this plant will focus sunlight on tubes that contains water. The light heats the water, creating steam, thus turning turbines.

At full capacity, Kimberlina will generate 5 megawatts of power, enough for 3,500 homes in Central California. Although this is a small amount of energy when compared to other utility scale power plants, this plant will serve as a gateway for a much larger solar plant.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and Ausra, the manufacturer of the solar panels announced a purchase power agreement in November, 2007 for a 177 megawatt solar plant. Once completed, the Carrizo Plains solar plant in Central California will generate enough power for 120,000 homes.

Solar technology is particularly well suited for the American Southwest where vast amounts of sunshine make this region rich with solar energy potential. Air conditioners are responsible for a large amount of the electric load and the highest electric demand corresponds with solar radiation.

Ausra is well known for their claim that 100% of the US electric load (day and night) could be generated in an area that is 92 miles by 92 miles. This is made possible by steam storage, thus allowing solar plants to operate after the sun has set.

http://cleantechnica.com/2008/10/27/first-solar-thermal-plant-in-20-years-launches-in-ca/#more-1373

There is no question that green has captured the imagination, if not the pocketbooks, of new-home buyers. But that begs another question: What can sellers of existing homes do to compete with builders for the hearts and minds of potential customers?

The answer is plenty. It’s just a matter of how much money you want to spend. You can turn your place into at least a pale shade of green for, say, no more than $500. Or you can go all out by spending thousands.

Obviously, you can’t do anything about the house’s orientation to the sun, for example, and you can’t extend the roof’s overhangs.

But it doesn’t cost all that much to switch out the light bulbs or install water-saving devices. And while it is far more expensive to replace outdated appliances or leaky windows, it may prove more costly in today’s market not to make those kinds of improvements.

Green is “an additional power play,” says Michael Kiefer of Green DC Realty, a certified eco-broker, a relatively new professional designation awarded by the National Association of Realtors to members who complete an advanced curriculum and demonstrate a proficiency in sustainability.

No, you might not recoup your cost, dollar for dollar. But depending on how effectively you market the place, you should be able to sell at closer to your asking price.

You also could end up selling faster. And at a time when houses are sitting unsold for up to a year or longer, the importance of speed can’t be overstated.

To see where your house stands on the color spectrum, Kiefer suggests an energy audit by your utility company or hiring an independent home inspector to go over the place and let their findings be your guide.

A reason for greening up is to demonstrate to would-be buyers that you were serious about keeping your home in peak operating condition. According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University, most owners spend less than $1,000 a year on maintenance, which isn’t enough to keep most homes running properly.

- – -

Different shades of ‘green’ to suit every homeowner

If the idea is to stand out from the crowd, here’s what you can do to be green, from the easiest to the more complex:

Light bulbs: In permanent fixtures, replace your regular bulbs with compact fluorescent bulbs. CFLs use only one-fifth as much energy as regular bulbs and last about 12 times longer.

Water: Switch to low-flow showerheads and faucets, and adjust the float in the toilet tank. Also, wrap your water heater in a blanket of insulation, and insulate the pipes that distribute hot water to your fixtures.

Weatherstripping: Fill in around windows, doors and wherever different materials come together on the outside of your house, such as where the cement or block foundation comes in contact with the wood frame.

Insulation: Check the attic to see if more insulation is necessary to bring the place up to a solid efficiency rating.

Ducts: Make sure that heating and air-conditioning ducts are sealed tightly. Some 20 percent of the air that moves through an HVAC system can be lost through leaks, holes or poorly-connected runs.

Thermostat: Replace your old dial-type thermostat with an electronic one that can be programmed to change the temperature when you’re not home.

Ceiling fans: Fans circulate conditioned air more evenly.

Windows: Consider covering the glass with insulating/reflective film. If the windows are balky or leaky, replace them with high-efficiency, double-pane, gas-filled units.

Doors: New front and back doors not only dress up the place, they can help save energy as well. “New exterior doors and windows that are energy efficient are a great investment,” says Dan Fritschen, founder of www.remodelormove.com, often increasing the value of the home by the same amount as they cost to buy and install.

Appliances: If your refrigerator and stove are old, they will probably be the first things the buyers jettison after moving in. So do yourself and them a favor — replace them and maybe upgrade to energy-efficient models.

Flooring: If the old linoleum floor in your kitchen is worn through, consider replacing it with something made from a renewable source, such as bamboo or cork.

Recycled materials: Using salvaged or recycled materials can be a winner for both your wallet and the environment.
Lew Sichelman. Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Ill.: Oct 10, 2008. pg. 5

The economic bailout package contains an assortment of benefits for consumers.
There are several new or extended tax credits to promote reduced energy use or alternative energy.

The law extends for eight years a 30 percent tax credit for homeowners who put solar panels on their roofs. Previously, the maximum credit was $2,000; that limit is removed, so that a homeowner installing a typical $20,000 system would be able to claim a credit of $6,000. There is also a new 30 percent tax credit for homeowners installing a small wind turbine on their property. Geothermal heat pumps also qualify for a credit.

A tax credit encouraging energy efficiency in existing homes has also been extended for a year. Improvements like installing a biomass stove or an efficient water heater will be eligible. Contractors working on new homes will be eligible for a credit of up to $2,000 if they include highly efficient systems for things like heating and cooling.

The law gives manufacturers of energy-efficient dishwashers, clothes washers and refrigerators a tax credit.

And owners of plug-in electric vehicles will be eligible for a tax credit of up to $7,500 that will start to phase out after 250,000 of the vehicles are sold in the United States. (There are now an estimated 250 plug-in hybrids in the country, most of them converted hybrids like the Prius.)

TARA SIEGEL BERNARD and KATE GALBRAITH. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Oct 4, 2008. pg. C.6

DAVID JOS has been soaking up the sun for almost a year now and, frankly, he’s becoming a bit strange.

Take his daily ritual, for instance. First, he opens his front door and makes a beeline to two metal boxes, roughly a foot square, outside of his home behind a euonymus bush. He checks the digital numbers and smiles broadly. Sometimes, he glances at the cumulative reading. Then, he smiles again. Lastly, he examines his electric meter and smiles once more.

He does this every morning and every evening. That explains the path worn in his lawn.

“Sometimes you get a little crazy,” Mr. Jos said.

What is driving him crazy — in a good way — are the 70 solar panels fastened to the roof on the southeast side of his home on a little more than an acre here.

Mr. Jos, 62, a retired state tax administrator, remembers the day they were installed.

“Right away the meter started running backwards,” he said. “I thought, oh man, I love this.”

Driven by higher fuel costs and spurred by federal, state and local utility incentives, the use of solar energy has surged in the last several years. Evidence of the growth is reflected in the solar homes tour this weekend sponsored by Renewable Energy Long Island, an alternative energy advocacy group.

For the first self-guided tour five years ago, 36 homes were chosen. Three years later it grew to 101, a number that was reduced to a more manageable 75 this year, from Hempstead to the Hamptons.

Since 2003, the number of properties drinking in the sun on Long Island has risen to 1,300 from 321, said Gordian Raacke, the executive director of Renewable Energy Long Island. About 50 of those are commercial, the rest residential. The Long Island Power Authority has about 1.1 million customers.

“There’s been a dramatic expansion,” Mr. Raacke said. “The market is really hot.”

So, what kind of reviews does solar get from homeowners on the tour? The answers range from a grinning thumbs up to an absolute rave.

“All in all, it’s been very positive,” said Tina Guglielmo, who had 22 solar panels placed on her East Hampton home last spring. Although not a large quantity, they easily produce enough electricity for her family’s 960-square-foot home, she said.

Her system cost about $30,000, which was reduced to around $9,000 after a rebate and tax credits, said Ms. Guglielmo, 48, an office administrator.

She said she figured the interest payment on the loan taken out to cover the installation was about what the family would otherwise be paying for their electric bill. The loan will be paid off in 10 years, she said — good news, since the panels are guaranteed for 25.

“That means we’ll be getting 15 years of free electricity,” she said.

Exact numbers are hard to come by, but solar energy system costs have been dropping because of improved technology, increased competition and rebate incentives, said Neal Lurie, a spokesman for the American Solar Energy Society, a nonprofit organization. A Web site it offers — www.ASES.org/gosolar — provides a free estimate of the costs of installing photovoltaic cells as well as what rebates and state and federal tax credits are available. (The House and Senate are considering federal legislation that would extend tax credits for wind and solar energy beyond this year.) The Web site also has a link to a calculator that helps buyers determine how quickly they can recoup their investment.

Most homeowners require a six-kilowatt system for their electrical needs, which would run $46,490 with equipment and installation, according to LIPA. The LIPA rebate, plus state and federal tax incentives, should reduce that cost to about $19,000, said Michael J. Deering, the authority’s vice president of environmental affairs. That is about half of what systems cost when LIPA’s rebate program began six years ago, he added.

Solar isn’t for everyone, and not just because the initial investment can be expensive. Homes with heavily shaded yards have problems with sufficient exposure to the sun. Power generation is reduced during winter months and on cloudy days. The system does not work at night, which is why it is good to be plugged into a larger grid that can supply evening needs.

None of those concerns bother Jeff Stanger, who watched with glee as his electric meter began spinning backward a year ago after he had photovoltaic cells placed on his Lido Beach home. His electric bills last year averaged between $200 and $300 a month, he said; now they are $80 to $100. He figures it will take about nine years to pay off the system, which he said cost about $8,000 after rebates and tax benefits.

“I don’t know why more people don’t do it,” said Mr. Stanger, 49, a chiropractor. “You get your money back in such a short time.”

One effect of going solar mentioned by all those interviewed was an increased awareness of energy conservation. A year of basking in the sun tends to turn people green.

“I definitely don’t blast the air-conditioning anymore,” Mr. Stanger said.

Mr. Jos said he had had a similar epiphany.

“We used to recycle our newspaper, but that was about how green we got,” he said.

His solar panel additions have made him much more aware of conservation, Mr. Jos said, so much so that he has replaced every conventional light bulb at home with a compact fluorescent bulb. After much searching, he also tracked down the source of a significant power drain — their landscape lighting, which was on all night.

“We were entertaining the possums and raccoons and the guys coming back from the bars at night,” he said.

Nowadays, Mr. Jos and his wife, Mary, 60, will occasionally turn on the floodlights that illuminate the flag in their front lawn.

One drawback Mr. Jos mentioned about going solar is that if one panel is blocked by shade, it can turn off the entire panel configuration. That is why on snowy winter days he climbs onto the roof to clear off his cherished cells.

Soon, if they keep up their ways, the Joses will be getting a check from LIPA for the power their system has sucked out of the sun for the year and sent to the utility. Just thinking about it gets Mr. Jos nearly giddy.

“We’ve gotten over dancing in the street,” he said. “The neighbors complain.”
James Kindall. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Oct 5, 2008. pg. LI.1

High energy prices, concerns about global warming, and an influx of venture capital are helping to insulate the state’s growing green technology sector from many of the forces battering the financial world, analysts say.

“I think it would be tough to find another sector where you could say that the fundamental market drivers are as strong, if not stronger, than ever,” said John Balbach, managing partner at the Cleantech Group, a research and financial services firm with offices in San Francisco and Brighton, Mich.

Despite the economic crisis, Balbach said, demand for products and services that save energy hasn’t waned because consumers remain worried about the long-term cost of gasoline and heating their homes. Also, environmentalists are still pushing for alternative and renewable sources of energy and fuel.

Last week, Cleantech reported third-quarter 2008 venture investments in North America, Europe, China, and India totaled $2.6 billion, 37 percent more than the same period last year. So far this year, $6.6 billion has been invested in the sector, up from $6 billion in all of 2007.

The National Venture Capital Association, a trade group, and the accounting firm Ernst & Young, also say venture capital investment in clean technology has grown rapidly in the last several years. According to a recent Ernst & Young report on global venture capital investments, $2.2 billion was invested in the clean-tech sector in the first six months of this year – a pace for 2008 that would exceed the record $3 billion invested last year.

Meanwhile, Greentech Media, a Cambridge-based industry research and analysis company, recently released numbers showing that in the third quarter global venture capital investment in green energy technologies topped $2.8 billion – more than in the first half of 2008.

But the emerging industry is not immune to problems. While venture capital might be available to fund companies’ start-up phases, established operations will have a harder time obtaining loans and other funds needed to build facilities such as manufacturing plants or wind farms.

And the sector also is not safe from the current stock market malaise. The closing price on the Wilderhill Clean Energy Index, which tracks the sector, has been dropping relatively steadily for the past several weeks.

“A lot of what is going on in our sector is what is going on in all sectors, which is that our stock prices are all over the place and more down than up,” said Ethan Zindler, an analyst for New Energy Finance which provides information and research to investors interested in renewable energy and low-carbon technology. “On the flip side, the interesting thing is that we’ve seen a really, I would say, a spectacular amount of venture capital investment in the sector this year.”

The continued investment in clean- and green-tech companies makes sense to Jon Abe, vice president of business development at Nexamp, a North Andover company that installs clean energy technology such as solar panels. Nexamp is so busy it has a three-month backlog of work, despite having grown from five employees in the summer of 2007 to 25 employees now.

“As long as folks are spending, we see clean energy projects as a very promising and logical investment opportunity,” Abe said.

Dave Power, a partner at Fidelity Ventures, which has offices on Federal Street in Boston, said investments in clean- and green-tech firms are going strong because venture capitalists are looking at investment timeframes of five to 10 years when making decisions about whether to back a new company.

“It’s about aiming at where the puck is going to be and not where it is today,” Power said. “I just think the drivers here are too powerful to slow down this juggernaut.”

Still, there are some concerns, especially for older companies looking to move from research and development to manufacturing and sales of products like solar panels or biofuels.

“Getting VCs to do the financing is one thing, but then you have to build the plant,” said Eric Wesoff, a senior analyst for Greentech Media, “there may be a slowdown in the buildout of these technologies.”

Though optimistic that clean-tech will be better insulated than other industries – especially with the extension last week of two federal renewable-energy tax credits – recent economic problems could reduce demand for environmentally friendly products and services, said David Prend, with RockPort Capital Partners, a venture capital firm with offices in Boston and Menlo Park, Calif.

“There is no question that in a recession, all companies tend to look very hard at their spending, and we can’t judge today – it’s too early – where in these priorities green spending may fall out,” he said. “If this craziness turns into a global depression, I think nobody is going to escape that.”

THOMAS SMALL is an accomplished cook, so it’s important for him to try new and exotic ingredients every now and then. When it came to the construction of his eco-friendly house, that’s exactly what his architects gave him. After all, crushed sunflower husks and shredded blue jeans don’t sound like typical building blocks.

But in the world of green design, such ingredients are not rare. So now, Mr. Small and his wife, Joanna Brody, along with their two very young children and a pair of large French Briard dogs, share a prefabricated urban building that has become an example for others looking for creative ways to go green.

The project began with a challenge from one friend to another. “We want the greenest house you’ve ever designed, but we have almost no money,” Mr. Small recalled telling Whitney Sander, who, with his wife, Catherine Holliss, runs Sander Architects, of Venice, Calif. Another goal was that it be a quiet retreat and acoustically resonant to accommodate a passion of his, chamber music recitals.

Inspired by the house that Charles and Ray Eames created in 1949 from a prefabricated steel frame and doors, windows and the like ordered from a catalog, the architects took the project on the condition that they could pursue a novel strategy. Besides using acrylic, Panelite, recycled steel and Styrofoam, they would try unusual ingredients like sunflower husks for wall panels and bookshelves, and blue jeans (for insulation).

It was an unorthodox vision for a site containing little more than a decrepit bungalow. Hoping to start a family and eager for abundant space and natural light, Ms. Brody, 44, and Mr. Small, 49, bought it a few years ago, exchanging a three-story Santa Monica town house for a bargain on a leafy cul-de-sac in this former blue-collar neighborhood.

Because they have ties to the arts (she works at home as a public relations consultant to arts and environmental groups; he was a movie writer and producer and is now a marketing consultant to architects and also a music critic), they considered the location and its new art galleries and restaurants ideal.

The bungalow wasn’t worth saving, so in its place the architects gave them a prefabricated structure with a customized steel frame and panels. The materials, which cost $22,000, arrived on a flatbed truck and were erected in three weeks, for $18,000. The contractor, Sean Icaza, embraced the chance to master a new way of building, but the biggest cost was time: with a tight budget, planning and construction stretched out for three years. The final cost, including trim, plumbing and so on, was $528,000, only about a third of the going rate for architect-designed houses of this size in the Los Angeles area.

The 4,200-square-foot house, which is low-maintenance and has a small carbon footprint, rises to the 30 feet allowed by zoning. It runs along the site’s north side and, through five glass doors set side by side, opens southward to a long, thin yard. There is a duplex rental apartment over the carport in front, and bamboo and bougainvillea have been planted at the edge of the plot for screening.

The house fulfills the owners’ ambition to create a work of art that is intensely green: it relies on cross-ventilation for cooling and passive solar energy for heating, and recycled water irrigates the garden. Three sides of the house are clad in folded steel panels the color of a good burgundy. The fourth side, the south wall, is a geometric assembly of concrete, acrylic and glass, inspired, Mr. Sander said, by a Georges Braque Cubist piece, “Aria of Bach.”

To create rigid buttresses that support the upper floors, wire mesh and rebar were wrapped around Styrofoam and sprayed with concrete. For insulation and sound absorption, the ceiling and walls were lined with two layers of shredded jeans, part of them exposed. Held by wire mesh, they complement the screw-on panels of fiberboard, made of crushed sunflower husks and rising to 16 feet in the living area.

An open kitchen provides Mr. Small with a command post for entertaining. The entire living area is lighted from suspended bars and frames of halogen spots that are dimmed for energy conservation and will be replaced by L.E.D.’s, which are expected to become less costly.

The north wall is lined with built-in bookshelves accessed from a shallow ramp. Made of broad bamboo stair treads, the ramp serves as a gallery for concerts on the concrete floor below. Lining it is a railing of rice grass laminated within sheets of tempered glass.

The ramp leads to the second-floor master bedroom, where clear windows near the ceiling offer a prime view of the light shows outside. “I love waking up to unshaded light and watching the passage of the moon,” Ms. Brody said. “On July Fourth, we watched four fireworks displays from our bed.”

Michael Webb. New York Times. (Late Edition (East Coast)). New York, N.Y.: Oct 16, 2008.  pg. D.6

Green building has become a common topic in the building industry, but the term can be confusing.

Does it mean that the house is energy efficient? Or, that the roof has solar panels? Or, that all the products are made from recycled materials?

Depending on the home and the builder, the term “green building” could mean any or all of those things. Green building is a broad term that covers everything from aesthetic elements of the home to structural building components and the use of recycled materials.

While green building is not the norm in production housing, it is being seen in some semi-custom and custom homes. The amount of green building will vary, from appliances and fixtures that save energy to an entire house built with efficiency and conservation in mind.

Robert Lord Builders, for example, is building a 15,000-square-foot house in St. Charles that uses green systems and energy-efficient products through the structure. The house, in the Red Oaks subdivision, is built with a geothermal heating and cooling system, which uses the Earth’s ability to store heat in the ground. The system stores heat and transfers when needed, unlike a traditional furnace or boiler that draws heat from gas, electricity or oil.

Other elements of the St. Charles house, from the house wrap to the insulation to the windows, are designed to reduce air loss and save energy. The house is priced at $4.8 million.

When examining the green-building topic, builders also should focus on how much energy is used to bring the products to the house and how long they will last, Lord said. “When building a green home, you have look at all you do in construction — from the distance it travels to the issue of obsolescence to how you reuse materials.”

The movement toward green building is spurred by many environmental factors, but also by changes in building designs and an increase in the availability of “green” products. “Ten years ago if I wanted to build a 4,000-square-foot home I would have needed two furnaces, but today I can use one high-efficiency furnace,” said Nick DiCosola, president of Distinguished Dwellings Ltd. in Hinsdale, which builds homes in the $2 million range.

That one furnace — that may range from 90 to 92 percent efficient – - is enough because it would be combined with double-pane windows, insulated doors, and other structural elements that all come together to produce an energy-efficient home.

When shopping for a “green” home or one with green features, buyers should consider the two main categories for green building. The first category is the aesthetic materials, such as tiles or countertops made from recycled glass. The second is the functional items that are part of the housing structure, DiCosola said.

Those who truly want to have an impact on the environment should look for more structural changes, as they can add up to influence energy usage and reduce material waste. A roof that will last 30 years instead of 20, for example, translates to fewer materials in the landfill. “I’m looking for that functional green payoff in the long term,” DiCosola said.

Builders and home buyers also should think carefully about the materials – - where they come from and how they are produced and reused. While everyone touts bamboo as a green product — because it is a renewable grass and does not come from a tree — one has to look at how much energy is used to transport it. “Is it green anymore if it’s coming from another part of the country?” DiCosola said.

While reducing reliance on natural resources is a key part of green building, there also is a need to manage the resources everyone has to use, such as water. When designing a house, a builder should take into account many products that are used frequently, such as faucets, toilets, showerheads and sprinkler systems, said Court Airhart, president of Airhart Construction, which is building homes priced from $500,000 to $1 million in the western suburbs.

There are many low-flow faucets and showerheads, and low-flush toilets that can be added into a home. There also are products consumers can buy after they move in that can help monitor energy usage.

Buyers who do lots of gardening should invest in a rain gauge to determine how much watering is necessary. The same holds true for how heating and cooling systems are used. Setback thermostats are inexpensive and can do wonders in helping reduce energy bills and energy waste. Regular maintenance also is important, Airhart said. “It’s getting your heating and cooling people in during the spring or fall to make sure the system is running properly.”

Homeowners may have to look at how much green building they can afford and whether they are willing to maintain the house to the green standards. A builder can fill the house with water saving products, but if the homeowner does not focus on water conservation, those savings may be lost.

Home buyers also should make sure the design fits with their budget and location.

“People say that you’ve got to have geothermal and solar energy,” Airhart said. “Geothermal is great, but is it cost effective? Solar panels are nice, but are we in the right climate for them?”

ALLISON E BEATTY. Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Ill.: Aug 22, 2008.  pg. 7