“There are very strong indications that the current rate of species extinctions far exceeds anything in the fossil record.” That’s from a 2010 special issue on climate change and biodiversity from the UK’s Royal Society.

In 2011, a Nature Geoscience study found humans are spewing carbon into the atmosphere 10 times faster now than 56 million years ago, the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), a time of 10°F warming and mass extinction.

An even more ancient extinction is the subject of a new study in Science (subs. req’d), with the tongue-twister title, “Zircon U-Pb Geochronology Links the End-Triassic Extinction with the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province.”

As the MIT News release puts it:

Some 200 million years ago, an increase in atmospheric CO2 caused acidification of the oceans and global warming that killed off 76 percent of marine and terrestrial species on Earth.

Whereas human activity is the source of the rapid surge in CO2 emissions today, the source of the surge 200 million years ago is now widely thought to be volcanoes:

… most scientists agree on a likely scenario: Over a relatively short period of time, massive volcanic eruptions from a large region known as the Central Atlantic Magmatic Province (CAMP) spewed forth huge amounts of lava and gas, including carbon dioxide, sulfur and methane. This sudden release of gases into the atmosphere may have created intense global warming and acidification of the oceans that ultimately killed off thousands of plant and animal species.

Now researchers at MIT, Columbia University and elsewhere have determined that these eruptions occurred precisely when the extinction began, providing strong evidence that volcanic activity did indeed trigger the end-Triassic extinction.

Today, of course, notwithstanding the claims of some disinformers, “Humans emit 100 times more CO2 than volcanoes,” as Skeptical Science explains in one of their classic myth-debunking posts.

So what is the connection between what happened in the End-Triassic Extinction and our current mass extinction? As ClimateWire (subs. req’d) explains:

Read more

Solar power is on the rise, even as the growth rate of U.S. electricity consumption has been slowing. This year, energy generated from solar power will be the second-largest source added to the U.S. electric grid.

“Solar is going to move into the No. 2 position in terms of new build, second only to gas,” Recurrent Chief Executive Officer Arno Harris said in an interview yesterday at the company’s main office in San Francisco.

Rooftop solar systems can be installed for about $4 a watt and utility-scale systems for $2 a watt, Harris said. “We can see our way to $1.50,” he said. “At those kinds of costs, we’re competitive in the Southwest with conventional electricity.”

Panel prices have fallen almost 69 percent in the past two years, benefiting companies such as Recurrent that purchase and install the equipment and sell electricity from the systems to utilities. Falling costs also have enabled developers to accept lower-priced contracts. First Solar Inc. has signed a power purchase agreement for a project in New Mexico that will sell electricity at a lower rate than new coal plants earn.

Specifically, another report projected the U.S. would install a total of 4.2 gigawatts of solar PV power in 2013. Last year, the U.S.’s share of the global solar installations grew strongly, from 7 percent to 11 percent. Globally, expected demand for solar photovoltaic installation is expected to grow by two gigawatts, or a 7 percent rise.

Solar, wind, and biomass comprised all new installed electricity capacity that came on line in January 2013. Despite what certain news organizations would have you believe, the U.S. has great potential for solar power, especially in the Southwest. And despite what you may hear about individual companies, the industry is growing globally and creating jobs in the U.S.

Where can the U.S. look to for inspiration for ways to further strengthen solar capacity in the U.S.? Rooftop solar installations in certain sectors of the Australian market have already reached the saturation point, to the extent that the peak electricity demand curves are being reshaped. For instance, midday electricity demand on the grid is down 15 percent despite higher nighttime demand.

As solar power grows, the need for adequate energy storage grows too. Fortunately, a recent report shows that global energy storage is expected to grow exponentially in the next nine years.

This weekend, Senate Democrats passed a federal budget for Fiscal Year 2014. In order to do so, Senate rules allow for consideration of any amendment that is brought to the floor. Senators introduced hundreds of amendments, which resulted in a “vote-o-rama.”

Many conservatives offered amendments to undermine existing and potential public health safeguards, particularly those that would attempt to reduce climate pollution. Below are seven deadly amendments to curtail protection for our children’s health and heritage. As usual, these conservatives are focused on protecting dirty energy companies profits at the expense of public health.

• Blunt #261: This amendment would have blocked future legislation to impose a carbon tax or fee to reduce industrial carbon pollution and raise revenue. Specifically, the amendment would create a “point-of-order” against any carbon tax measure that could only be overcome with a three-fifths vote of legislators. While it would have been a mostly symbolic move, the fossil fuel industry’s friends in the Senate are reiterating their opposition to government action on climate pollution. However, the impacts of climate change have already been felt across the country — in 2011 and 2012, the United States suffered from 25 climate related storms, floods, heat waves, drought, and wildfires that each caused at least $1 billion in damages, with a total price tag of $188 billion. The Blunt amendment would allow these damages and costs to grow unchecked. Result: FAILED 53-46
• Coats #514: This amendment would have struck down key Clean Air Act protections by authorizing the President to exempt any industrial facility from complying with air toxics standards for two-year periods. Essentially, the amendment would have given a free pass to coal-burning power plants from EPA’s 2011 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which were put in place due to the well-documented health risks of mercury, arsenic, and the millions of pounds of additional hazardous chemicals. Methylmercury from coal pollution accumulates in fish, poisoning pregnant women and small children. Mercury can harm children’s developing brains, including effects on memory, attention, language, and fine motor and visual spatial skills. Upgrades to the aged and dirty coal plants will also significantly reduce harmful particle pollution, preventing hundreds of thousands of illnesses and up to 17,000 premature deaths each year. “The ‘monetized’ value of these and certain other health benefits would amount to $37–90 billion per year,” the Environmental Protection Agency determined. Republicans are once again trying to protect the dirty energy industry over our children’s health. Result: FAILED 46-53
• Alexander #516: This would “repeal … the wind production tax credit.” The PTC provides a tax credit of 2.2 cents per kilowatt hour of electricity to encourage investment in clean wind energy. A CAP analysis determined that “wind power helps lower electricity prices.” Along with state renewable portfolio or electricity standards, the PTC has enabled “the wind industry … to lower the cost of wind power by more than 90% [and] provide power to the equivalent of over 12 million American homes.” A Navigant Consulting analysis predicted that eliminating the PTC would cost 37,000 jobs. Some argue that we should end tax provisions for clean technologies, including wind. However, this ignores the fact that the oil and gas industries have received $80 in support for every $1 for wind and other renewable energy sources over the past 95 years. In addition, the Alexander amendment would ignore the annual $4 billion in special tax breaks for big oil companies. Result: Did not come to the floor for a vote.
• Inhofe #359: This amendment would “[prohibit] further greenhouse gas regulations for the purpose of addressing climate change.” This would have prevented the EPA from enforcing the Clean Air Act as interpreted by the Supreme Court, which ruled that EPA is required to regulate carbon and other climate change pollutants that endanger public health and welfare. EPA proposed the first carbon pollution standard for new power plants in 2012. After it is finalized, EPA must set limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants — responsible for two-fifths of U.S. carbon pollution. Such reductions are essential to stave off the worst impacts of climate change. Result: FAILED 47-52

Read more

Alta Devices CEO Christopher Norris

A Silicon Valley solar company has developed a method for manufacturing light, ultra-thin, flexible, and durable solar cells that manage to convert a record 30.8 percent of the energy in light into electricity. The company, Alta Devices, previously set a record of 28.8 percent conversion efficiency with another form of solar cell.

It hopes its latest creation could be adapted to fit small mobile devices such as smartphones and iPad tablets, which until now have only been able to fit conventional solar cells that are much less efficient and charge slowly.

Here’s the quick summary, via Energy Matters:

Alta Devices has announced a record 30.8 percent efficiency with its latest generation dual-junction thin-film solar cell, a breakthrough the company says has the potential to vastly improve the battery life of mobile systems.

The record efficiency has been verified by the USA’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the same body which last year confirmed Alta’s record of 28.8 percent efficiency for its single-junction solar cell.

Alta’s technology is based on flexible thin-film solar wafers made from gallium arsenide (GaAs). GaAs solar cells are far more expensive to manufacture than traditional PV cells, but with such high energy conversion levels, the new dual-junction cell allows for more energy to be generated over a smaller area, making them perfect for use in devices such as smartphones, tablets and other portable devices.

The gallium arsenide layer, while not the entirety of the completed cell, is incredibly then — approximately one micron, or one-fortieth the width of a human hair — reports the New York Times, which also has a more detailed description of the cells’ construction process.

Alta has already developed a prototype cover for a Samsung Galaxy phone and is working on designs for other smartphones. If it works out, the solar cells could vastly improve the battery life of most mobile devices for very little cost:

It wouldn’t do away with the battery. But depending on the light level where the device was carried, it could add 80 percent to the battery life. The main benefit would be outdoors or on a windowsill, because sunlight has about 100 times more energy than the light typically provided by fluorescent or incandescent lamps. Indoors, it might add only 10 to 15 percent. But the efficient type, gallium arsenide, is not only better overall at capturing energy; it is also better suited to capturing energy in low-light conditions that the ordinary silicon solar cells.…

A smartphone would probably take a patch of film with a peak output, in full sunlight, of 1.5 watts, he said, which is probably only about $3 worth of materials. (A cellphone plugged into a wall outlet generally draws 3 to 5 watts, [Christopher S. Norris, the chief executive of Alta Devices] said, and an iPad, about 10 watts.) “If you’re in full sun, a watt and a half for 10 minutes will give you an hour of talk time,” he said.

Alta has even posted a calculator online that can estimate the benefits of the cells in different types of light.

The technology remains in the development phase: Alta’s only actual customer so far is the military, which uses the cells to cut down on the batteries soldiers have to bring into the field, to reduce diesel fuel consumption at fixed bases, to power drones, and to sew into everything from backpacks to tents. But the company is already eying an advance into the automobile market: while the surface area of a car wouldn’t provide enough energy to power the motor, it could power additional functions like air conditioning, power steering or power brakes.

Alta already has a pilot manufacturing line to take care of the demand from the military, and a 40-megawatt factory on track to begin construction next year solar components for smartphones and other mobile devices. “[The 30.8 percent target is] also an important step toward our target of 38 percent efficient cells,” Norris said. “We continue to redefine the boundaries of what is possible with solar power.”