Menendez Lays Down a Solar Challenge

One Senator has chosen to pay attention to The Solar Decathlon on the Mall and issue a challenge. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) has issued A Challenge to Universities. He opened with a strong statement of praise and support for The Solar Decathlon.

Every two years at this time of year, an exciting thing happens on the National Mall in Washington D.C.: the Department of Energy's Solar Decathlon. It is a competition in which universities from around the globe compete to design, build, and operate homes powered solely by the sun. This year's competition, like every past competition, features no representation from New Jersey universities. As a leading supporter of solar power in Congress, I know well that our state is a world leader in solar technology. That's why I think it is high time that our state's renowned educational institutions show that they too are world leaders in solar technology.

The deadline for applications for the 2011 Solar Decathlon is coming up fast, 17 November. This is not far away for what is a quite serious commitment. When one gets a chance to speak with Solar Decathletes, the extent of the challenges they faced and the achievements they've made in raising funds, designing and building the homes, developing innovative features, and simply making it to the Mall become even more impressive. The 20 teams, no matter who wins or who comes in 20th, merit credit because they all have impressive elements and they all are, eminently, habitable, net-zero homes.

But, back to New Jersey ...

Senator Menendez lay down a marker for NJ's educational institutions:

I hereby issue a challenge to New Jersey's universities and colleges to enter the 2011 Solar Decathlon.

If there is a New Jersey Decathlon entry in 2011, it seems clear that Menendez will lead the way among Senators laying down some bets in the competition.

The nation would be better off with more attention to the Decathletes, their homes, and the real possibilities that their work shows for more efficient and renewable energy in America's homes.

Kudos for Senator Menendez for doing his part to highlight the Decathlon and the opportunities it presents.

Some discussions of the 2009 Solar Decathlon:

Houses:

• A Solar Decathlon Cheat Sheet


• The NORTHern Sun Hits The Mall


• A corner of The National Mall is s•ky blue


• Showing some CURIOsity at The Mall


• Cash is Green


• A Napa Valley Vision on The National Mall


• An ICON-ic statement about a better future


• An Illuminating Vision for Pavilion Living: VT's Lumenhaus


• Penn State's Natural Fusion


Policy / Overview / Events

• Let's see some bets under the sun


• Energy COOL Solar: The Solar Decathlon


• Secretary Chu Hits the Mall for Solar Decathlon ... and hits the Chamber while he's at it

Follow A. Siegel on Twitter: www.twitter.com/A_Siegel

Comments

[sheila]

Not to state the obvious, but if any of these legislators would actually put generous feed in tariffs, loans for efficiency and renewable energy upgrades and stringent building codes on their books, we might actually see progress both on climate change and the environment - without slaughtering 50 million more acres of ecosystem for so-called "renewable" energy.

This all comes down to policy. If we are serious about GHGs, we will fix the built environment. If we aren't, then we can't kill our open spaces, increase emissions, and deplete our groundwater to further enrich Chevron, BP, Goldman Sachs, Bechtel and the other Big Solar/Big Wind/Big Transmission Robber Barons.

Democratically owned, point of use solutions within the built environment are the only future we can actually count on, so why are they absolutely ignored in all the Wall Street/Big Energy welfare of ACES, ARRA and ALL state legislation?

[A. Siegel - Huffpost Blogger]

Seems to me that we can go a pretty far way toward knocking down emissions implications of buildings and of transport with just a few things:

* Execute Architecture 2030 / Ed Mazria concept for a loan buydown program based on energy efficiency to spark energy efficient/renewable energy renovations and new builds in both residential and commercial property.

* Program to electrify rail (cut 2.5 million barrels/day)

* Push ahead with electrification of other transport, in a nodal fashion (another 1+ million barrels/day in reduced demand by 2020)

Those three could, writ large, might well cut US emissions by some 20+ percent (or more) by 2020 -- from today's levels, not BAU. And, as you're aware, there are many other opportunities to 'excel' and cut emissions.

[sheila]

Although I am sort of a fan of the Architecture 2030 plan, it puts "buying renewable energy" at the same level as "generating your own renewable energy," which is just incredibly skewed.

So-called Big Solar and Big Wind (and their buddy, Big Transmission) are so hugely harmful to the environment, they cannot be taken seriously as a "solution" by anyone who looks beyond the sound bytes. Meanwhile, we have the current, existing capability to generate 100% of total US electricity usage, at this moment, using only existing rooftops and thin film PV (per the DOE):

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/printable_versions/myths.html

As long as we are thinking "long term" and "sustainable," we need to do cradle-to-cradle on the "Big Renewables" and when we see how devastating they are to ecosystems and global warming (SF6, concrete, steel, destroyed carbon sinks, construction emissions, water waste, etc.), we will push much harder for point of use solutions within the built environment. Seriously, we cannot kill tens of millions more acres of wilderness and crow about how "green" we are - it's ridiculous.

there is a VIABLE solution now - we need policies to get it going. Rooftop/ In-city Brownfield PV needs to be widely (and democratically) built where we already are, and where the power is needed...

thanks for your always interesting posts!

[alvdh1]

We have two utility structures in this country. Guaranteed Rate of Return (GROR) in 48 states and the ISO structure in New York and California.. The biggest impediment to the widespread adoption of alternative energy is the GROR structure. This is a government sponsored utility monopoly designed to enrich the utilities and eliminate consumer choice. It eliminates risk for the utilities by ensuring that they can pass all of their costs onto the ratepayers and still receive a guaranteed rate of return.

GROR fosters waste. It encourages the development of large centralized power stations of the coal variety. The rate srtuctures are then dsigned to reward large commercial users of electricity to waste energy by offering them lower rates than residential customers. Once the capacity of a power plant has been absorbed, they petition the PUC/PSC to build another plant.. In essence, commercial users are rewarded to use more electricity on the backs of residential consumers. The plants necessarily become energy hogs building up for daily power demand curves as opposed to leveling demand.

The ISO prices electricity based on demand. It is a self-regulating form of time of day pricing that encourages the shift in consumption to off peak hours. The ISO is capable of a accomodating feed-in tarrifs more readily than the GROR structure because the ISO buys power from all suppliers and sells it into the market. California passed feed-in tarrifs this week, but has yet to set the tarrif rates.