WastedEnergy

Topics on Energy, Resources, Waste and Culture

Archive for October, 2010

Highway to Hell

Posted by wastedenergy on October 31, 2010

Welcome to Fort Chipwyan, Alberta.  If you’re looking to cash in on Canada’s “oil” boom, here is where you want to be. 

Whether we’re talking about building, grading, and widening highways to accommodate McMansion-sized trucks and whole factories being hauled to the site, or the tar sand itself being transported and processed by those vehicles and equpiment, shoveling asphalt is the only game in town.  You don’t have to drive a tar sand truck or work in an upgrading plant, but whether you work laying down airstrips or milling steel for new pipelines, there’s many a bucktoothed buck to be made in selling your soul to Syncrude.  99% of the universe here is composed of dark energy. 

It’s a pretty good deal for everyone involved, unless of course you happen to be one of the few remaining quaint folk who prefer to live off the fruits of the land rather than profiting off fuel shipped in from the underworld.  Thin strips of land separate the tar sands operations and the vast pits of waste sludge they produce from the Athabasca river and its headwaters, the essence of life for countless generations of farming and fishing communities.  Crops, livestock, fish, and people now die bearing mysterious markings and tumors never before seen by the First Nation elders of these communities.  Government officials and university professors living off the oil dole from boomtowns named after the original people to inhabit this countryside dismiss their concerns over the water’s toxicity as just so much “folklore” and hogwash.  Perhaps a healthy environment is something citizens of Earth should be prepared to give up in the name of progress, as the lands once known for their bounty are covered over in pavement and plastic.

We now travel a few hundred miles west, where something strange is afoot in a remote corner of British Columbia.  The zombie invasion, we shall soon see, is no longer limited to Alberta and the Gulf of Mexico, and the infestation has begun to feed on anything it can find that hasn’t already been chewed up by mountain pine beetles:

Look a little bit closer, and some familiar patterns begin to take shape:

What we are looking at in these photos is, of course, the signature “circuit board” pattern of fracking, the process now used to unlock much of the energy used to keep spinning the wheels of the oil machines over in Alberta.  North American natural gas, the primary fuel used to boil tar out of the ground and upgrade it to synthetic crude oil throughout an ever-increasing share of Canada’s middle provinces, has already peaked and has been in decline for the past decade.  And the tar sands are always hungry for more gas.  Look a little bit closer, and the thoroughness of the change that is happening becomes clear.  Some of the last remaining wild lakes and rivers in the whole continent now sit adjacent to massive industrial operations, where a single careless spill or feckless operator has the potential to poison vast and formerly unspoiled ecosystems for generations to come.  These remote waters are now being tapped.

You’re probably saying to yourself: wait a second.  Isn’t natural gas supposed to be abundant in North America?  It’s touted as an “alternative” fuel, even though it already makes up a quarter of the continent’s energy mix.  But supposedly we’re sitting on a veritable bonanza of cheap methane, much of it in the form of shale gas, tight gas sandstone, coalbed methane, and such “unconventional” gas sources, right?  And all of it is going to cost $3.50 per thousand cubic feet to develop and bring to market, so cheap we can afford to put off living sustainably for as long as anyone alive today cares…no?

The media echo chamber continues to recite the conventional wisdom that technological breakthroughs are responsible for the oversupply of gas that has depressed prices this season.  Meanwhile, the gas producers themselves have begun to sing a different tune and are now liquidating their assets to those able to bail out the industry, as revenues at such low prices are unable to keep up with the costs of production.  The trend over the past several months has been increasing consolidation of smaller, independent gas-drillers into large multinational corporations with diverse portfolios and a wider range of hedging options.  The likes of Exxon-Mobil and the China National Offshore Oil Company are the kind of names you see coming up in the news about shale gas today, but it’s not because they think the gas is going to come for cheap.  It’s because these are the companies that have the cash flows and deep pockets to hold onto undeveloped land and poor-performing wells while the price of natural gas recovers from years of continuous new drilling subsidized by swindled shareholders and high costs hidden by arcane accounting procedures. In the meantime, the executives of these companies continue to talk up their gas plays in an effort to convince the public and the market to continue to support gas development off which they have no intention of making a profit anytime soon, at least not until the gas markets witness another one of the price surges we have started to see over the past decade.

Meanwhile, as more and more fracks per well are used, the energy and water intensity of the process expands: the amount of energy consumed by trucks hauling fluid and equipment to and from drilling and disposal sites, and the energy needed to process and transport the produced fluids and gas skyrockets along with the water consumed to drill each new well.  As gas from wells fracked dozens of times in British Columbia flows eastward to the Alberta tar sands, more oil is needed to produce more of this “natural” gas, which in turn is needed to produce more oil.

 

As the circle formed by such a tail-chasing operation continually expands and a surplus of energy production disappears, less energy, and hence less wealth, becomes available to the rest of society, until finally the profit of fossil energy completely disappears and energy production itself becomes impossible to sustain.  By the time we catch on to what is happening, will there be anything left to keep us cruising down our own highways?

What we are talking about is not new technology, of course – just look at how the industry likes to bring up the “50,000 wells that have been successfully fracked without incident over the last fifty years.”  What we really mean is the application of old technology, formerly used to squeeze the last bits of juice out of dying wells, as the now-mainstream means of acquiring onshore oil and gas in the United States and Canada.  The process mimics what is happening in the tar sands, as the toxic byproducts of an energy- and water-intensive process claim a growing share of ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.  What we have now begun to do is multiple-frack the countryside in all corners of the continent to free up the last few little pockets of energy, in a vain attempt to stave off the ever-dwindling gap between what the rest of the world can afford to export and what we can afford to consume.  In other words, it is the classic story of peak oil and gas: newer, more expensive technology and methods used to access and process ever-smaller and more remote resources of continually lower quality.  If it can’t go on indefinitely, it won’t.

Whatever the noise of the market says from day to day, the signal only points in one direction.

Creepy…Happy Halloween

Posted in Air, Climate Change, Energy Consumption, Solid Waste, Urban Planning, Water and Soil | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Medium Rare

Posted by wastedenergy on October 20, 2010

Those who thought critical material shortages were a non-issue are about to get a little shock therapy.  The sleeping giant is awakening.

To be sure, a small but doggedly persistent group of ecologically-minded intellectuals has spent the past few years following and working to educate the public on the problems with promoting endless economic growth in a finite world with constrained supplies of essential materials.  But these discussions have largely focused on supplies of energy, while paying little attention to the creeping problems with supplies of matter.  So the debate over peak oil, for example, has become more or less played out, with familiar debates between doomers who insist that the majority of cheap oil has already been extracted and that society faces inevitable declines, even collapse, as a result of dwindling supplies, versus cornucopians who hold that the magic of free markets will always produce better technology and acceptable substitutes anytime a material such as oil is in scarce supply.  The opposing sides in this debate have become so locked in place and tunnel-visioned that almost everyone missed the impending supply crisis in rare earths, an obscure class of elements poorly understood but very much taken for granted by the vast majority of the populace.

All the technologies we take for granted as part of a twenty-first century economy are built on a foundation of stable supplies of rare earth elements, as well as other materials that could easily become unavailable in the quantities needed for manufacturing such as the platinum group metals.  The computer you are using to read this article wouldn’t exist without them: the light-emitting diodes in your flat-panel display require rare earth elements, and the magnet in your hard drive uses neodymium.  You could go and buy a replacement that doesn’t need these materials, I suppose, but first you’d have to get in your car to drive to the store – and your car uses platinum group metals for its catalytic converter and fuel refined using rare earth catalysts.  You could save fuel by driving a hybrid or electric vehicle, or take mass transit, but then you’d need more neodymium for the electric motors and quite possibly lanthanum for the batteries.  The military could secure you a supply of fuel by invading the Middle East, but they’d have a hard time doing so successfully without night vision goggles, drone aircraft, smart bombs, or radar systems – all of which use rare earth elements.  The prospect of critical shortages might even make you so anxious you want to call for help (or call your Congressional representative to take action), but your cell phone won’t do you much good: rare earths in there too.

The power of neodymium compels you!

The cornucopian theory of infinite substitutability now faces a key stress test.  Is the free market really capable of anticipating and heading off supply problems as its proponents claim, or were rare earth supplies a blind spot for business leaders as much as anyone else?  If this is the first you’ve ever heard of rare earth elements, you’re certainly far from alone.  So why are the media and political leaders paying so much attention now?  Rare earths, unlike what the name might suggest, are not even all that uncommon, so why have supply issues suddenly become so urgent?

As is often the case in critical materials, the real concern is not with the amount lying in the ground – rare earths are used only in relatively small quantities, and trace amounts can be found throughout the Earth’s crust.  The problem lies in the physical reality of the developed supply chain: China, which controls much of the world’s easily minable deposits, has taken the lead in producing these elements and today enjoys a virtual monopoly on production, which it has begun to leverage in trade conflicts with Japan and now the United States through export quotas and embargoes.  Even as Western nations developed a dependence on rare earths for technologies that have come to be essential for manufacturing, consumer goods, and defense applications, China was able to produce these elements at such low cost (in no small part thanks to its seemingly inexhaustible supply of cheap labor and willingness to look the other way as environmental standards are violated) that domestic producers were simply priced out of the market.  Virtually all non-Chinese rare earth mines have now been closed for some years, and even reopening mothballed production facilities will take several years, with new mines facing lead times of a decade or more.

Meanwhile, as with other supply-constrained materials, political leaders ignored the warning signs of import dependence and associated security concerns and proposed half-baked solutions, if any at all.  In 1995, in fact, conservative Republicans who had just taken over the U.S. Congress even went so far in their zeal for shrinking government and outsourcing industries as to abolish the U.S. Bureau of Mines, the agency that had overseen research and development on rare earths and which could have proven instrumental in developing a secure supply chain.  As if the political right wing in the U.S. needed any more fractures, the need for provision of stable domestic supplies of rare earths for military uses would seem to put the defense hawks at odds with the free-market devotees, no?   I’ll continue to follow the rare earth saga as further developments unfold, but for now, it may suffice to say the way the whole issue is going these days, it’s looking more and more like we’ll be marking a point squarely in the doomers’ column, and a lot sooner than anyone might have guessed.

Well done, indeed.

Posted in Energy Production, Urban Planning | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Circuit Breakers

Posted by wastedenergy on October 13, 2010

Laissez les bon temps rouller, non?  While bickering continued between Obama administration officials and everyone’s favorite Ragin’ Cajun Senator Mary Landrieu over whether the Interior Department’s new(?) rules after lifting the six-month moratorium on new drilling were sufficiently agreeable to the oil and gas industry, trouble of a different sort was brewing across the pond.  In a year apparently characterized by reactionary lunacy not just in this corner of the globe, French President Nicolas Sarkozy cozied up to nativist interests in a vain and ultimately embarassing attempt to distract voters from unpopular pension reform measures by violating E.U. law in singling out ethnic Roma for camps to be dismantled and their residents to be deported.

Now that the political fallout from the episode appears to be settling, it is worth mentioning some of the other toxins still floating in the air.

The French law under which the Roma were expelled requires temporary settlers to find the means to provide for themselves within three months, or else face expulsion.   But it appears the French leaders themselves have been unable to fulfill the demands of this law.  For to achieve economic self-sufficiency, a necessary prerequisite is the ability to effectively manage the entropic byproducts of prosperity.  In this case, the Roma, long among the most downtrodden people of Europe, have taken on the thankless task of recovering valuable metals from the junked electronics produced by the French, who have embraced the obsolescence and waste cycle with a zeal that seems downright American.  So if the Roma are expelled, I assume the French will be forced to turn to the same methods the rest of us use: sending waste electronics to the Chinese.

The past year or two has seen a flurry of new regulations and corporate social responsibility promises to crack down on the growing export trade in waste electronics.  You would think it would be quite a bit easier than it is to keep all those cell phones and hard drives from being loaded onto container ships to China.  After all, there’s not just gold, but something that may be even harder to come by in there: rare earth minerals like neodymium, an essential and irreplaceable ingredient in industrial magnet production, and lanthanum, used in the light-emitting phosphors found in flat-panel monitors and televisions.  Unfortunately, in our attempts to maximize volume in our recycling programs by stacking as much paper as possible, we seem to have lost sight of what kinds of materials really might be worth holding onto, and the world (minus China, where we keep sending more and more of them all the time as part of our recycling programs) faces a critical shortage of many rare earth elements within as little as a two-year timeframe.  Meanwhile, the price of rare earths has gone up by around 700% in just the past couple of months.  And we never bothered putting any effort into figuring out how to recycle the stuff.  It’s a shame, really.

While we’re on the topic of e-waste “recycling”: maybe, just maybe, it is actually better to bury old leaded glass cathode ray tubes in landfills, where they are unlikely to be disturbed and remain in a form that poses little in the way of health risks, unlike smashing them and separating the lead from the glass by hand (if you want more, we could get into the gory details of berylliosis).  There are ways of dealing with some (though not all) of these hazards in the recycling process, although they do make the process quite a bit more expensive, more even than your usual recycling programs.  The waste management method that recovers the most material is not always, automatically, the best or the most environmentally sound.  And while the idea of “zero waste” might sound appealing, and waste minimization actually can bring substantial benefits, it behooves us to keep in mind that the goal of “zero” waste is unattainable not only for reasons of practicality, but because it violates physical first principles.  It is impossible for any physical process to be perfectly efficient and hence produce no waste at all, and we shouldn’t set ourselves up for goals that do little but rhetorically empower opponents of what often is the best way to manage a given material, plain and simple.

All the attention given to the matter of e-scrap also begs the question of what is happening to all the other materials collected from the First World for recycling.  We know from the plastic recycling industry’s own reports that #1 PET containers (think Aquafina, or as Lewis Black put it, “the end of water as we know it”) are mostly exported, with over 50% of recovered containers being shipped to China as of 2008.  I haven’t found a more recent report, but I can’t say whether the reason is simply that the 2009 numbers have yet to be released or that they would prefer not to say (I assume the exported fraction can only have increased).

One difference between the issue of e-scrap, which has grabbed the public’s attention on 60 Minutes and in a number of other media reports, and the rest of the materials recycled or managed as municipal waste, is that the latter is more or less invisible.  There are no well-publicized municipal-corporate partnerships here or public outcry to ban the export of plastic bottles.  Maybe if people knew what conditions were like in the workshops in China and elsewhere that process the stuff, very often the same kinds of conditions you find in the e-scrap recycling industry so often reported, even sensationalized, by the media today, there might be some of those things.

Of all the forms of entropic pollution generated by humanity, our discarded goods may be the most hidden (we love to bury it), the most remote (we love to put it in someone else’s backyard) and even the part we feel the most compelled to pretend does not exist (it’s pretty trashy stuff, after all).  But guess what?  It’s all staying right here on this planet, it’s real enough that a good number of people make an honest living from it (not just the Roma either), and it matters enough that we need real answers for what to do about the stuff.  Talking about it just isn’t enough.

Will the circuit be unbroken?

Posted in Air, Solid Waste, Water and Soil | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

ASPO-USA World Oil Conference: Day 1 Report

Posted by wastedenergy on October 8, 2010

Day 1 of ASPO-USA’s conference was an enlightening perspective from a good number of viewpoints on a variety of environmental and energy matters concerning us today and tomorrow.  It was a great privilege to attend a meeting of so many minds today, but I do have to say, I was a little disappointed in the turnout.  Very few public officials seemed to feel the matter of peak oil and energy and resource security matters deserved their attention on this first day of the conference, and only a handful of media were on hand to record today’s proceedings.

I felt a real diversity in the audience and speakers was lacking as well.  As I scanned over the audience and listened to today’s questions (didn’t manage to get myself called on today, but we’ll see if I can get the moderator’s attention at Arthur Berman’s session tomorrow) there was certainly a diversity of intellectual viewpoints expressed, but it was disappointing to look out onto a sea of mostly white, middle-aged faces.  It is our younger generation that holds the greatest stake in the critical resource and environmental challenges of tomorrow, and we must begin to speak out for ourselves and our own interests in these issues that will define our future and the fate of the world in the century and more to come.  Just as importantly, it is imperative that the voices of communities of color be heard, who have very often been and are still today disproportionately affected by many of the environmental and public health hazards created by our modern, industrial-energy-based society.  To consider a path forward on energy without paying heed to environmental justice matters is to ignore the very most pressing problems of environmental health, the toxic byproduct from communities handed the privilege of outsourcing their ecological footprint to someone else’s backyard.

While the conference provided a great deal of analysis on the availability of oil and other fossil fuels, another matter needing attention that was scarcely discussed was the impending and critical shortage of many other mineral resources, perhaps most importantly including rare earth minerals, and the urgent need to develop practical and environmentally sound ways of developing supply chains for not just energy, but all the minerals we take for granted that have become so important to such modern luxuries as radar systems, hard drives, cellular phones, hybrid car batteries, gearless wind turbines, and of course, oil refining catalysts.  A presentation providing an update on rare earth and other critical material issues would certainly be more than appropriate considering the subject matter dealt with at this event (Hint: ASPO, I’d be more than happy to fill this role for you or moderate such a session if needed at next year’s conference, and may or may not know one or two other people who could talk about it too, unless the shortage hits before October 2011 and spells The End Of The World As We Know It).

HIGHLIGHT: Catching a Cheseapeake Energy employee making an offhand remark to the woman sitting next to her about the climate change sessions being “balderdash.”  Very professional, and bonus points for using a word seldom heard since the 18th century.  Her comment went a long way toward showing just how much the natural gas companies really care about building climate-friendly bridges to the future, or whether they are really just interested in making a quick buck off those who might otherwise make an actual difference and in the process burn down some of those same bridges.

Some of the more memorable sessions I attended today:

Jeffrey Brown, independent petroleum geologist, spoke about the effect of net oil exports on the availability of the petroleum fuels we so take for granted in virtually everything in society that moves.  The supply of total world oil production and the amount that is actually exported from the countries producing it, from the standpoint of a country that imports the vast majority of its oil like, say, the United States of America, is actually a lot more important than the effects of the ”global peak” (which, incidentally, already occurred, back in late 2004).  The take-home point was that we all need to start thinking about the peak oil issue @ way sooner than right now, and going back to just yesterday won’t even help in the slightest.

Jonathan Callahan informed us that Gas Balancing Alerts were forced three times in the United Kingdom last year, and while he believes overall world production of natural gas will continue to increase, natural gas is of course a regional game, and it is in the very near future (actually, the present) that natural gas and other shortages will begin to rear their ugly heads in the UK and elsewhere.  Don’t hold your breath for an explosion in U.S. shale gas availability either, although given the amount of fracking going on over here, you might want to just hold your breath in general.

Oh, and of course, lest you forgot about China’s coal-truck-induced 20-day traffic jams, China is burning a lot of coal.  A lot lot lot.  India too.  Also, the United States and the rest of the world still burn a lot of coal – even more than before, in fact.  All told, pretty much more coal all around than anyone in their right mind can possibly imagine, and definitely way more than anyone would ever want to.  In fact, we burn so much coal that we may darn well be pretty tootin’ close to doing something a lot of people thought we could never ever do: run out of it.

Quick question I never got to ask Dave Summers, (Heading Out over on TheOilDrum), just to play devil’s advocate: According to Dave, the claim by some recently published research that we have already reached global peak coal production is false because unlike oil, we can directly measure how much coal remains by going underground and looking at the “thickness,” and we know a lot still remains.  While some coal reserves have been downgraded to mere resources, he asserts that as the global coal price rises, they will surely be upgraded to reserves again.  My question: if the price of coal rises, why the hell are we still mining coal?  I thought the only reason we mined it was because it was so cheap, at least until you start actually putting a price on its pollution?  And isn’t it a bit of an oversimplification to outright dismiss alternative energy technologies while reducing modern coal mining to “a pick and a shovel”?  One could just as easily say solar energy is as simple as planting trees, or that wind energy is as simple as putting up a sail (actually, come to think of it, they are).  Unlike a few professed photovoltaic “skeptics” (you can show someone something a billion times and they’ll still be convinced it doesn’t work), we know there are actual alternatives to burning coal to generate what people are actually looking for.  Sure, we’ll still have plenty of coal for the future – coal to hopefully make into graphene and activated carbon.  We just won’t have enough to burn for energy.

Finally, in what certainly seems to me to be an abuse of the ”net energy” concept and a little graphplay that hopefully wasn’t lost upon an audience that professes not to be innumerate, I’m sure the Dutch will be interested to know that you can’t actually get any energy from the wind (and I guess unlike oil and gas, better technogy doesn’t improve the outlook either).  What a shame.

Looking forward to Day 2, and I’ll do my best to be a real thorn in everyone’s side!

Posted in Agriculture and Food, Air, Climate Change, Energy Consumption, Energy Production, Solid Waste, Urban Planning, Water and Soil | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Pop Go The Weasels

Posted by wastedenergy on October 7, 2010

The oil and gas people are lucky almost nobody reads their industry news save for themselves.  Because when you take a look at what the insiders have been saying lately, you get the sense that they agree with what I, and the other skeptics, have been saying, a lot more than they might care to admit directly.  If  you read the linked article here carefully, you’ll notice that the latest industry talk concerning shale gas, which is supposed to be America’s reliable domestic energy source for the next “hundred years” or so, is all about the poor performance of existing “shale plays” and the inability of exploration and production interests to make back anywhere close to the amount of money they have sunk into drilling wells and building pipelines, especially at the prices of gas being traded today on the New York Mercantile Exchange, as if a single price were even capable of representing the different costs of bringing natural gas to market in all the different regions of the country.

So that whole cheap, clean, abundant natural gas thing is all a myth, no matter how much industry mavens like Chesapeake want to promote it, particularly all over the Metro station that services the U.S. Capitol.  Not that I have any idea why they would have chosen that particular site to sell their message.  After all, most of our policymakers are well-versed in energy and natural resource issues, and surely they wouldn’t be fooled by an industry-led P.R. campaign.

In any case, the point to keep in mind about “energy tomorrow” in the form of natural gas or any other fossil fuel (we seem to be at the peak of global coal production as well) is that either it ain’t cheap, or it just won’t be there (as in, it won’t be in our pipelines anytime soon).

What exactly would be the reason for papering over the bubble?  Who benefits?  Certainly not skeptics of the optimistic outlook speaking the truth within the industry, like Arthur Berman.  It seems dissent is not tolerated within this industry.  And certainly not consumers, who will have to pay the cost of whatever energy we are using, even if investment decisions are based on false and even intentionally misleading assumptions about what kinds of energy really are expensive.  It does look like there might be some benefit for the oil and gas producers, however.  There is a certain weaselish quality in the rhetoric of the natural gas promoters in particular, selling the idea that we can have cheap energy as long as we increase our investment in gas production, infrastructure, and electrical generating facilities while simultanously using today’s low gas prices as a reason to avoid a full-on commitment to renewables.  It was only January back when Boone Pickens was telling us he was all but ready to get out of the wind energy business altogether and cancelling his turbine orders because the price of natural gas was so cheap.  Now he’s saying natural gas rigs should remain idle until the price rises because it’s impossible to make back the cost of marginal production at current prices. 

So which is it, Boone?  Is gas cheap or expensive?  I don’t care about the gas in the pipeline today; “today” is the least important time when talking about energy.  Tell me something that actually matters in determining what kind of energy investments we should be making for tomorrow, and the day after tomorrow.

Remember, different energy sources, with different manufacturing bases requiring expansion under different strategies, still compete against each other for their respective share of the energy market.  There’s no real reason why you need natural gas before you can build renewables; all it really does is expand the existing manufacturing base and production infrastructure to make the United States and the world more dependent on fossil fuels.  Where incrementalism might make sense in building up the capability to shift to renewable energy, it makes no sense at all in committing to half-measures that do nothing but reinforce a status quo that cannot be sustained.  The gas just isn’t there.

Why does ultra-short-term price matter at all?  Power generating facilities are long-term capital investments.  The energy we use today is a result of decisions made decades ago; we need to think about 10-, 25-, 50- and even 100-year prospects, not the price of oil and gas today or the day-to-day movement of markets, based on factors that could not be more irrelevant to much-needed long-term planning prospects.  Moreover, over that long run, the price of natural gas, or any other finite energy source, only moves in one direction.  So even if natural gas really is a viable “transition fuel” – and given the emphasis of the ad campaigns on how we have supposedly barely scratched the surface of its potential, it seems some have already lost sight of the transition concept – completing the transition through a robust commitment to truly clean energy, renewable energy, is at least as important as the initial, gas-powered phases.

I’m off now to this year’s ASPO-USA conference here in Washington.  I hope to learn something new and connect with other truth-minded individuals more interested in the big picture of resource constraints tomorrow than in making a quick buck today.  Hopefully I will be able to do a bit of liveblogging, or at least post-blogging, during and after the conference, and I will be sure to report back anything especially interesting that I hear while in attendance.  Wish me luck!

Posted in Energy Consumption | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.