a Business Spectator publication

CLEANTECH BUZZ: Energy innovation Tipping point?

When people talk about revolutionising energy distribution and usage, more often than not it involves the development of large-scale renewable energy power plants, the implementation of a variety of efficiency measures and a broadscale smartening-up of electricity grids. But for venture capitalist and Nanoholdings CEO Justin Hall-Tipping, the future of energy supply will be a lot more simple: "The power plant of tomorrow is no power plant," Hall-Tipping told the crowd at a TED talk back in July. "The grid of tomorrow is no grid. And energy, efficient, clean energy, will one day be free." Some pretty bold statements, to be sure, but Hall-Tipping is not in the business of run-of-the-mill thinking. He likes to think outside the square to solve problems, and he challenges others to do so too. Currently, he and his company are working on the development of solar cells into a clear film that could be applied to a window and generate, distribute and store power. Hall-Tipping says that to achieve this, the company approached a group of scientists at the University of Texas in Dallas, and gave them the below diagram, and said "could you build this?"

And, he continues, "these scientists, instead of laughing at us, said 'yep'." And they built a machine called an eBox, which he says is testing new nanomaterials to park an electron on the outside, hold it until it's needed, and then to release it and pass it off. Being able to do this, says Hall-Tipping, would means being able "to generate energy cleanly, efficiently and cheaply right where I am. It's my energy. And if i don't need it, I can convert it back up on the window, to energy, light, and beam it, line-of-sight, to your place. And to do that, I don't need an electric grid between us." Hall-Tipping says that if this can be achieved, and done at scale, it would also provide the final puzzle piece – the ability to provide clean, drinkable water for all. "In a  world where energy is freed, and transmittable easily and cheaply, we can take any water, wherever we are, and turn it into whatever we need."

And if that all sounds a bit far-fetched, it quite possibly is. But Hall-Tipping believes it is this kind of "magical" thinking that is required to solve some of the world's more serious problems. "For 200 years, we as a society have thought of our energy as energy derived from  combustion," he told TED in an interview last week. "And the only question that I ask is, and how’s it doing for us? Not so great. The culmination of humanity’s intellect of many hundreds of thousands of years when presented with this problem of 'how do we stay warm in winter?' is basically to burn our environment. If you release the constraint of 'I don’t have to burn everything, and is there a better way?' you’re already seeing inklings... that, yes there is, you actually can do this differently."

And as the same goes for our thinking on solar cells, he says. "What the world has taught us in solar cells is: I’m going to go pay X, and it’s going to sit on my roof, and it’s got to have this footprint, and the total install cost per house is 50 to 100 thousand bucks with inverters and the whole bit. ...[But if] my average ownership of the home before I move... is, say, five years, ...why am I bothering to put a solar cell on my house? Because it’s got a 20 year payback... That’s the kind of thinking that I think goes on in people’s minds. So I say, 'Well okay, what would you want to be able to do?' One, you drive it from a price point, I need to add something that is essentially Saran Wrap that would go on a window... And maybe it only needs to last three years, because it’s inside the window, stuck on, and I can rip it off and put another one on. Because if it’s flexible, I can put it on any surface. And if I don’t have to make it last 30 years outside, maybe I have a different business proposition entirely."

Burn bras, not coal

The bra, once a humble undergarment, has now joined the growing list of unusual things that, once discarded, can be transformed into a fuel source, with Japanese underwear makers collecting used bras to recycle into a solid fuel for industrial use – a move, says The Manichi Daily News, that is aimed at raising bra-makers' profiles as environmentally conscious companies, while also "offering a solution to ease the anxiety of Japanese women who feel uncomfortable about tossing out their underwear." Triumph International Japan began, in 2009, providing free plastic bags to customers, who were then encouraged to fill them with their old or unneeded bras (of any brand) and bring them back to the stores. "I won't have to worry about what to do with my old bras any longer if manufacturers take them back," a 33-year-old housewife said at a Triumph store in Tokyo. The woman said she used to cut her bras into pieces before disposing of them, being one of many Japanese women who find it embarrassing to throw out their underwear along with other waste.

Triumph has collected more than 200,000 bras since it began the program in 2009 and turned them into 14 tonnes of refuse paper and plastic fuel (RPF). Wacoal, another major lingerie maker, has collected more than 179,200 bras and produced 17.9 tons of the fuel since 2008. Bras are typically made of a blend of fabrics and wires built into the underside of the cups, and producing RPF out of the bras is virtually the only recycling method manufacturers have been able to come up with. But according to the Japan RPF Association, expectations are high for it. Compared with refuse-derived fuel made from house garbage, RPF contains less impurities and water, the association says, and emits very little dioxin when incinerated. It also has as high a combustion efficiency as coal and coke but generates less CO2. The association also claims RPF costs up to one-fourth as much as coal and demand for it as an alternative to fossil fuels is expanding.

Counting on cleantech long-shots

We've written here before about certain long-shot clean technologies that, if realised, could solve a lot of the world's most pressing problems. Last week, The Guardian performed a similar roll-call, listing their top 10 innovative clean technology breakthroughs on the verge of pushing new boundaries. So what were they? Number one was algae fuel, which the paper says could make up as much as 12 per cent of all aviation fuel by 2030, as long as the cost comes down and worldwide austerity measures don't interfere. No. 2 are zinc air batteries. Zinc, says the paper, offers a recyclable, relatively cheap and high energy density alternative to lithium ion – as well as being 100 times more plentiful – but they will need to make the shift to being rechargeable and longer-lasting to really compete. And for the rest: 3. Organic solar cells; 4. Marine energy; 5. Smart lighting; 6. Pyrolysis oil; 7. Building micro-automation; 8. Reliable offshore wind technology; 9. Cost-effective desalination processes; and 10. Carbon capture and storage.

Comments on this article

Clean Technology Breakthroughs

As part of a group in CSIRO conducting research on algae fuel and other biofuel projects more than 30 years ago, I am amazed that people are still hyping up the prospects of algal technology now. As far as I have I observed, there have been no breakthroughs in this field sufficient to make it anywhere near an economic replacement for crude oil, even at $100 per barrel. There are also major practical issues in growing algae on a large scale which would make it very difficult to produce algae commercially on a large scale. There are any number of enthusiastic spruikers out there who say that they can produce oils from algae, but there is still no scientific evidence that such processes are both practical and economic. Without evidence, I am very reluctant to accept such claims. Pyrolysis oil from wood is not so difficult, but it would need a lot of processing before it could be used in engines, and there are other ways of profucing biofuels from wood which do not suffer from that problem. The biggest problem with developing biofuels in this country has always been pressure from the oil industry, not the science.