You are currently browsing the monthly archive for November, 2008.
Though they might be well intentioned, pure EVs are far from becoming a reality anytime soon. Sad, but true.
By Lawrence Ulrich of MSN autos
Click to see more pictures
The Tesla Roadster is undeniably efficient; it delivers roughly 105 miles per electric gallon. But can the Silicon Valley electrocar company deliver them?
Get ready to pull the plug: Tesla is done. Well, almost. While the fledgling electrocar specialists haven’t hung a “gone fishing” sign on the front door just yet, it might be just a matter of time. That isn’t changing anytime soon, regardless of how much money company founder and newly appointed CEO Elon Musk can scare up for his pet project. And this group of Silicon Valley geniuses isn’t alone. You can simply add Tesla’s name to the long list of electric car builders that have talked a big game and failed to deliver.
You remember Tesla, right? It’s that band of Internet whiz kids, backed with Google bucks, who claimed its electric Roadster would revolutionize automobiles and show the Detroit dinosaurs how things could be done. You needed buckets to catch the slobbering hype in the media, a reservoir to hold the wishful thinking. But the company lacked two key elements: experience in designing, building and selling cars and the billions of dollars needed to create a real car company. Plus, it’s only offering is a two-seat, $110,000 sports car that makes as much sense for the fuel-crunched, cash-poor American family as a lunar lander.
Now, Tesla is in full damage-control mode. The Roadster has been endlessly delayed, plagued by a balky transmission and only a handful (60, at last count; all of which have the inferior transmission) of the 1,200 pre-orders have trickled out to customers. Though the California-based automaker recently received an influx of $40 million, it had to lay off more than a quarter of its employees and announce it only had $9 million in the bank. Not enough to finish developing its Model S, a $70,000 electric sports sedan whose 2010 launch has been — you guessed it — delayed. I’ll put this nicely: You might think twice about putting down a deposit.
Now let me emphasize that Tesla, unlike ZAP and other notorious P.T. Barnums of electric vehicles, has always impressed me as a company of sincere, dedicated professionals. These guys believe in their car. They believe that electric vehicles, or EVs, can help break the world’s dependence on fossil fuels and reduce pollution. You have to respect the company’s motives and passion. But its execution has a lot to be desired. The same can be said about Fisker. It projected a production run of about 15,000 Quantum Hybrid sports cars, but has yet to produce a single one.
Discuss: What do you think about the future of electric vehicles?
While the media isn’t about to apologize and clean up the spilled ink on Tesla — an Exxon Valdez-sized undertaking — let’s at least file a lesson for the next time a high-voltage savior arrives. It’s time to stop falling for the hype. After nearly a century of fitful development, electric cars still aren’t ready for America. And America isn’t ready for electric cars. The Tesla is no different than General Motors’ EV1 of the late ‘90s. These cars may have been ahead of their time. But they weren’t ready for prime time.
Before you EV fans strap me to a 10,000-volt chair, let me be clear: I’m convinced that electricity will play a bigger near-term role than, say, hydrogen fuel cells. But I’ve long argued that 100 percent battery-powered cars face a psychological barrier, far beyond what hybrids face. What really scares consumers, beyond the unfamiliar technology, is the idea of being stranded miles from home and the nearest electrical outlet.
General Motors has come up with a name for it: range anxiety. It’s the reason that GM and Toyota have no interest in following Tesla’s lead with a pure EV. The audience is just too limited. Are you really ready for a car that might travel 200 miles at best, and then need up to eight hours to fully recharge? Be honest. If you are, you better call grandma and tell her you’re going to be late. If you’re an urban apartment dweller, as many green-minded folks are, you probably have no convenient outlet to recharge. Parking garages and curbsides could be wired up someday, but that day isn’t now. All those New Yorkers and San Franciscans who might love an EV probably couldn’t take the plunge, lacking a handy way to charge it.
Click picture to enlarge
Although the battery-powered Nissan Denki Cube shown here is a one-off concept, Nissan’s new line of EVs is expected to look similar and offer many of the same features.
Nissan says it will buck the trend and offer an electric car in the U.S. and Japan by 2010. That would make Nissan, which until recently dismissed the potential of EVs, the first major automaker to market a fully electric car in America.
Instead, GM and Toyota have targeted 2010 to release their first plug-in cars that travel farther on electric power than current hybrids. And these so-called Extended Range Electric Vehicles are backed up by gasoline engines, reassuring buyers that they can drive them anywhere, anytime, any distance.
For GM, that car is the high-profile Chevrolet Volt, the car GM hopes can help reverse its image and fortunes. I recently pored over the production version of the Volt in New York with its designer Bob Boniface and chief engineer Frank Weber.
The four-passenger hatchback sedan combines a sophisticated lithium-ion battery pack with an efficient 150-horsepower gas engine. Unlike today’s hybrids, the gas engine never powers the wheels, but sits in reserve to generate electricity when the battery runs dry. The Volt can travel the first 40 miles on battery power alone. Since 80 percent of Americans commute 40 miles or less round-trip, those people could drive to work every day without ever using a drop of gasoline. That 40-mile run would add roughly 80 cents to your monthly electric bill, a measly $4 a week to cover 200 miles. If you drive even 60 miles a day, the Volt would still deliver the equivalent of 150 miles per gallon.
The critical part is that you plug in the Volt to maximize efficiency, but you’re never forced to plug it in. You can drive it cross-country, stopping at gas stations like any other car. After 40 miles of electric power, the gas engine automatically kicks in to extend the total driving range to over 400 miles. GM says the Volt would save buyers $1,500 a year in gasoline, even compared to a car that gets a healthy 30 miles per gallon.
GM’s Weber said that “most buyers simply will not accept” a car that can’t drive hundreds of miles at a pop, or that inconveniences them for even a few minutes.
Watch Video: Chevy Charges Up Volt
The Volt sounds great on paper but still faces challenges, not least of which is the cost — driven by its pricey lithium-ion battery pack. GM hasn’t released a price but, reading between the lines, it’s looking more and more like the Volt will top $35,000. That’s far more than you’d pay for a comparable family sedan, but the Volt also comes with a $7,500 federal tax credit. In plain English, that means $7,500 straight off your tax bill. That’s a lot of sweetener, courtesy of a GM-friendly provision written into the recent Wall Street bailout. Toyota will fire back with a plug-in Prius, although the Toyota will apparently be eligible for a much smaller tax credit.
But with history as a guide, I’m keeping my expectations modest on the Volt. If GM can keep the price under $40,000, and sell maybe 10,000 in the first year, I would consider that a monumental success. Remember that hybrids have been on sale for over a decade, and still hold less than 3 percent of the market. And that’s for cars that you don’t plug in.
Plug-in hybrids may not be as sexy as the Tesla fantasy. But a rich man’s fantasy doesn’t pay the bills, cut pollution or foster energy independence. The plug-in hybrid can play in the real world, rescuing real Americans from high energy prices.
A Michigan native raised and forged in Detroit and a former auto critic at the Detroit Free Press, Lawrence Ulrich now lives in Brooklyn, New York. His reviews and features appear regularly in The New York Times, Robb Report, Popular Science and Travel + Leisure Golf.
For commentary on the latest auto industry trends or in-depth analysis of developments affecting consumers, turn to MSN Autos’ Industry Insider for the real story behind the facts and figures. Written by respected veterans in the field, Industry Insider delivers expertise and insight that helps make sense of the automotive world.
Source: http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-documentid=720175&topart=newcarresearch
From PESWiki
Page first featured Nov. 2, 2008
Magnetromapparata
The magnetromapparata was invented in 1933 primarily by Captain Hans Coler of Germany. The device required no apparent outside power sources to function. It involved magnets to generate electricity without any source of input power other than the space energy of Nature’s quantum invisible world.
It was denied patent protection by the German Patent Office as being a perpetual motion device. It was ignored, and the records relating to it were buried in hidden archives, possibly because the scientists who had to pass judgement could not understand the physical reason why the invention actually worked.
A 70 Watt prototype was built, and a company formed: Coler Gmbh. Later a 5 kilowatt devices was built which allegedly powered Coler’s house and laboratory for three years.
Official interest was shown by heads of the German navy who felt an investigation was necessary, and an official report was produced. A highly secret Nazi effort apparently had the goal of using his invention to recharge submarine batteries, without the need for the sub to surface. Experts examined the device and could find no fraud. It was judged Coler was an honest experimenter, but no expert opinion was forth coming as to how the unit operated. It was put under Official Secrecy after its operation had been verified by Government scientists. (Reference: Magnetic Power, Inc)
Contents[hide] |
Official Website
None, as the inventor died long ago, and no one entity is continuing the company work as its legal successor, that we know of.
How it Works
- THE INVENTION OF HANS COLER, RELATING TO AN ALLEGED NEW SOURCE OF POWER Part 1
- Part 2
- Part 3
- Hans Coler (Same as above but all in one place.)
- Harold Aspden, Lecture 7 The Coler Report – Why it Works – 1997.
The Magnetstromapparat
The Magnetstromapparat consisted of six permanent magnets wound so that the circuit includes the magnet itself as well as the windings. These six magnet-coils are arranged in a hexagon and connected in a circuit that includes two small condensers, a switch and a pair of solenoid coils, one sliding inside the other. To operate the device, the switch is left open, the magnets are moved slightly apart, and the sliding coils set into various positions. After the appropriate adjustments, at a critical separation of the magnets, an indicator appears on the voltmeter. The switch is then closed and the adjustments continue. Tension builds to a maximum and should then remain indefinitely. The greatest tension obtained was stated to be 12 volts.
The Stromerzeuger
The apparatus consists of three principle circuits which are inter-wound and intercoupled (verkoppelt) in a peculiar way. Some of these are divided again into single subsidiary circuits which evidently have all to be brought into resonance with one another.
The principle circuits (called the anchor) in which the energy gain probably occurs, consists of metal plates between which transformer coils are connected, the whole being connected to one large plate coil (Plattenspule).
On each of the single windings on this is coupled a large flat coil (Flachspule) (called field).
These flat coils are interwoven in two groups, these groups represent the turns of a transformer.
This couples, on one hand on the flat coils of the other group (as secondary coils), and on the other hand on the anchor-plate coil, which is placed between them.
The third electrically independent circuit (called the directing circuit) (Steuerkreis) regulates this transference.
This basic diagram shows the conditions necessary for self-interruption.
In consequence of this arrangement, different types of current are created in different conductors (pulsed direct current, alternating current, etc.)
The transformer coils, connected between the anchor plates, are connected in a peculiar way through thin permanent magnet rods. Their main object seems to be to pre-magnetize the transformer cores, it is, however, very probable that they are also connected with the Barckhausen effect, also shown by JLN Labs.
1. The basic principle is that an electron is to be regarded not only as a negatively charged particle but also as a South magnetic pole.
The basic element is that of an open secondary circuit, capacity loaded, inductively coupled to a primary circuit. The novel feature is that the capacities are connected to the secondary core through permanent magnets, as shown.
It is claimed that, on switching on the primary circuit, “separation of charges” takes place, i.e M1 becomes + vely charged and M2 – vely charged, and that these charges are “magnetically polorised” when they formed, owing to the presence of the magnets.
On switching off the primary circuit a “reversing current” flows in the secondery, but the magnets “do not exert a polarising effect on this reversal”
2. Two of these basic elements are now placed together making a double system or stage with the plates close together in parallel planes as shown:
The secondary windings are both exactly equal and wound in a direction such that on switching on the primary coil the electrons in the secondary coil flow from P1 to P2 and F1 to F2.
It is then stated that system F1 – F2 merely has an inducing effect, and the useful current comes into existence in the system P1 -P2.
3. A single stage cannot be effective but two stages connected so that the numbers of effective North and South poles are equal will provide a basic working arrangement.
More double stages can then be added to provide higher outputs.
4. It is then stated that as well as the normal electrons flowing from the battery and induction when the circuit is opened or closed “space electrons” flow from “repelling spaces” to “attracting spaces” between the plates.
Pictures
- Eine unglaubliche Geschichte um Politik, alte Kaiserszeiten und deutsche Fluggeräte von Hans Coler in Peenemünde – This photograph is reportedly (Robert Nelson)of a successfully Magnetstrom-Apparat replication made by George Hathaway and presented to the Free Energy Conference in the 80’s. The output was only 50mW (fifty milli watts). — Mark Snoswell
Videos
(5.46 Minutes) Steven Mark solid state generator
- This device is a variant and the successor to the “Magnetstromapparat” and the “Stromerzeuger” (= Magnet Current Apparatus / Electricity Generator; see the Coler Report). It is NOT dependent on earths magnetic field, can operate everywhere, without fuel and without moving parts. As the magnetic field is rotating in itself, the power can be increased considerably by increasing the “rotating” frequency and when we will be able to use superconductors at room temperature. (YouTube; July 19, 2008)
- – - -
(6.41 Minutes) Hans Coler Experiments
- Hans Coler claims the electron is a south pole. Physics teaches us the electron is a small magnet containing a north and south pole. Some test on the Hans Coler claim. (YouTube; July 06, 2007)
- – - -
(2.52 Minutes) Hans Coler Experiments 2
(YouTube; July 06, 2007)
History
The “Magnetstromapparat” was developed by Captain Hans Coler and Fritz Von Unruh early in 1933, and they were later assisted by Franz Haid of Siemens-Schukert, who built himself a model that worked in December 1933. Coler stated that the strength of the magnets did not decrease during use of the apparatus; and suggested that he was tapping a new sort of energy hitherto unknown. — “Raumenergie” (Space-Energy).
In 1933 Coler and von Unruh made up a slightly larger model with an output of 70 watts. This was demonstrated to Dr. F. Modersohn, who obtained from Schumann and Kloss confirmation of their tests in 1926. Modershon then consented to back the invention, and formed a company (Coler G.m.b.h.) to continue the development.
Modersohn´s connection with Rhein- metall Borsig, and hence with the official Hermann Goering combine gave him an advantage in this. Coler then in 1937 built for the Company a larger version with an output of six kilowatts. He claimed it powered his house and laboratory for three years. This led in 1943 to support by the German Navy. A highly secret Nazi effort apparently had the goal of using his invention to recharge submarine batteries, without the need for the sub to surface.
Patents
- Magnetic Power, Inc.Solid State Electric Generator – US 2006/0163971 July 27th 2006
- Patent application.
- 1939 Germany Hans Coler
Profiles
Inventor: Captain Hans Coler
Coverage
Directories
- http://www.hcrs.at/COLER.HTM – Coler Konverter (in German)
In the News
-
Featured: Solid State Generators >
Hans Coler Magnetic Power Apparatus – The “magnetromapparata” was invented in 1933 primarily by Captain Hans Coler of Germany. The device required no apparent outside power sources to function. It involved magnets to generate electricity without any source of input power other than the space energy of Nature’s quantum invisible world. (PESWiki; Nov. 2, 2008)
- Hans Coler – Why We May Never Have Needed Nuclear Power – A well-supported effort to follow up the British Report, that concluded the Coler work was real, might have prevented the launching of the nuclear power industry and its inevitable link to nuclear weapons programs disguised as power plant development. The current examples are, of course, Iran and North Korea. (Renewable Energy World; March 28, 2008)
Other Coverage
- The Inventions of Captain Hans Coler (Energy21)
- The Free Energy Machines of Captain Hans Coler (Energy21)
- Gravitation and Electromagnetic Energy from Curved Space Time – 10-page PDF. (Cheniere.org)
- Hans Coler – His remarkable inventions open a path to generating electricity without fossil fuels or nuclear power (MagneticPowerInc.com)
- Overunity Forum (Overunity.com)
- Rex Research Hans Coler (RexResearch.com)
- ZP Energy – Hans Coler – His remarkable inventions open a path to generating electricity without fossil fuels or nuclear power (ZPEnergy.com)
- Robert A. Nelson’s Report – Han’s Coler’s “Free Energy” Generators – 1999
- Patrick J Kelley – Motionless Pulsed Systems Chapter 3 Free Energy Systems (Free-Energy-Info.co.uk)
- Patrick J Kelley – Passive Systems Chapter 9 Free Energy Systems (Free-Energy-Info.co.uk)
- Zero Point Energy
- Magnetic Power – Perpetual Commotion – Updated Sept. 2008. (MagneticPowerInc.com)
- The inventions of captain hans coler (Yahoo 360)
Source: http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Hans_Coler_Magnetic_Power_Apparatus
“Electric power is everywhere present in unlimited quantities and can drive the world’s machinery without the need of coal, oil, gas, or any other of the common fuels.” – Nikola Tesla
I believe that several free-energy devices that appear to have drawn energy from disintegration of matter into energy, as described in the group description, only a few researchers realized how to efficiently convert it into electrical current and even fewer people actually knew where the power was being extracted from. People, whom I will not name, have been disseminating information for years that is far removed from the reality of radiant energy power generation, covering it up with deceptive theories. It is time to set the record straight and put the lame theories to rest forever. They have done a terrible disservice to humanity.
The real shocker in the course of my research came to me when I discovered early 1900 patents that show that Moray was not the original inventor of the “radiant energy receiver.” The patents had remained hidden because the inventor shortened his name when he immigrated to America. This served well over the years to protect the invention from prying eyes.
The patents represent a crude but functional radiant energy power device. Adding the “Swedish Stone” detector to the circuit was Moray’s actual contribution to the device, increasing the efficiency of conversion several-fold. The two men worked together until Moray passed away in May 1974. The patents have been added to the group file. With these patents it will become possible for you to build a radiant energy power generator that is both self-sustaining and will also provide useful electrical power.
Bruce Perreault Claims “Pre-Glow Discharge Between Electrodes” to be His Intellectual Property
From: “Bruce A. Perreault” <nuenergy@cyberportal.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 08:05:03 -0500
Subject: From my copyrighted and registered book – To Steve Elswick
Steve,
The enclosed text proves that the pre glow between electrodes is my original findings. All others that write about this effect in over unity or free energy devices and do not give me credit are thieves and do not have an ounce of integrity.
I will be demonstrating radiant energy proof of concept hardware at Inventors Weekend this year.
-Bruce
Pages 35 – 36 (revised 2003 edition) First edition was printed and registered with the copyright office in 1996.
A shared provisional patent was also shared with a former virtual lab assistant from Australia.
There appears to be a common thread shared between several alternative energy devices. It is the pre-glow discharge. The report on the Hans Coler device released by the British Government indicates that there is excess energy released when electrical contacts are opened and closed. The Lester Hendershot device utilized a buzzer circuit that opened and closed its electrical contacts. In the Alfred Hubbard coil pre-glow discharge flowed through electrical contacts, a distributor cap and radium soaked spark plug. The Joseph Newman motor used a sparking commutator. Thomas Moray invented a glowing, cold cathode discharge tube that was the heart of his radiant energy generator. Hermann Plauson was granted U.S. Patent No. 1,540,998 that used spark gaps to convert atmospheric energy. Frank Wyatt Prentice was granted Canadian Patent No. 253,765 that detailed his invention, which lighted 50 sixty-watt carbon lamps with an input of only 500 watts. His invention utilized a spark gap driven high frequency tuned resonant system. Chancy Britten used pre-glow ion valves constructed with a central wire that was surround by a coil of wire which is described in his US Patent No. 1,826,727. Britten’s valve was said to have lit up his home in the 1930’s according to a local newspaper article of that time period. Alexander Chernetski experimented with what appears to have been a type of ion-valve that was filled with hydrogen gas. It is said that he got up to five times more energy out of his device than what he put into it. Edwin Gray was granted U.S. Patent No. 3,890,548 for his efficient spark gap driven capacitive-discharge motor. He improved on this patent by replacing the spark gap with a pre-glow discharge switching tube. His U.S. Patents No. 4,595,975 and No. 4,661,747 describes this tube in detail. Gray’s patents claim to conserve battery power by sending unused energy back to the supply batteries. Gray thought that counter-electromotive force was solely responsible for recharging the batteries in his system. Radiant energy was generated during the pre-glow discharge cycle that also contributed to recharging the batteries. Paulo N. Correa and Alexander N. Correa obtained patents to their pre-glow discharge system that recovered energy and recharged a battery.
A pre-glow discharge generates radiant energy. The wattage produced will depend largely on the type of electrode materials that are used. I do not suspect that the above referenced inventors knew that their systems were generating and feeding back energy to their respective circuits.
According to the “sea electron model” metals are bonded to each other through electron sharing. In the embodiment in Figure 4 the negative charge on the wire negatively ionizes any gas that contacts it. These ions rush towards the positively charged cylinder. When an ion that carries an excess electron hits head-on with a positively charged metal atom the electron combines with atoms of the metal. The electron that is absorbed by the metal atom passes along its kinetic energy. This causes the metal atom to oscillate generating a photon burst. When ultraviolet photons are generated and impinge upon atoms some of these atoms are dissociated and excess electrons are released. The sea electron model helps to explain this effect. The model suggests that metal atoms be bathed in a sea of valence electrons. If this model is taken one step further it can be seen that when metallic atoms are dissociated from each other excess electrons are released in the form of raw electrical energy. This occurs because the electrons no longer take part in the inter-atomic binding force that existed before the disintegration took place. It becomes clear that impinging photons break the binding force between the inter-atomic structure. The freed electrons will add amperage to the output circuit to which it is connected. Henceforth, the equation I x E = P holds true in this system. Where, “I” represents the electrons (amperage), “E” electromotive force (ionic voltage), and “P” the power generated.
From: “Bruce A. Perreault” <nuenergy@cyberportal.net>
To: “Sterling D. Allan” <sterlingda@greaterthings.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: Bruce Perreault Claims “Pre-Glow Between Electrodes” to be His Intellectual Property
Sterling,
Please add this post to the article that you
have posted…
http://www.greaterthings.com/News/FreeEnergy/Directory/
Perreault/pre-glow_electrodes.htm
Pre Glow Discharge Credit Clarification
Hello Everyone!
Please do not misunderstand me… I want to make it clear that I am NOT claiming that anyone who has a glow between electrodes is taking credit from me. In fact… Igor Alexeff invented a glow discharge tube to control the power surges of a closing switch U.S. Patent No. 4,291,255. This patent comes close to what my ion valve does but it is not the same. There are others that I mention in my recent book that utilized pre glow discharges in their inventions as well. I have clearly given credit to these fine inventors. Specifically, the credit that is due to me is my finding that under the proper configurations and in the correct pre glow discharge environment more electrons can be released than what is required to trigger the release. This release of energy attains a high frequency oscillation that is indicative of the metal or metals involved in its release. T. H. Moray called this “Radiant Energy”. No other person to date has made the correlation in regards to the release of high frequency energy from metals and semi conductors and to the identification of the mechanism in the pre glow discharge that leads to this release of energy. This is what I stake my claim to. I also stake claims to a number of practical alternative energy circuits that utilize my unique findings. I hope that I have cleared the air today.
* I can not respond to response posts at this time.
-Bruce A. Perreault
Source: http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Perreault/pre-glow_electrodes.htm
Source: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/radiant_energy
Green investing — sometimes referred to as socially responsible investing — encourages investment agencies to focus on companies and investment vehicles that offer products and services that advocate a cleaner environment and practice sustainability when it comes to the use of resources. Leading the pack of these types of investments are companies that focus on cleaner or renewable ways to provide electricity and energy. The reason for interest is obvious: As oil prices continue to push record highs, over $30 billion in new investments was poured into the clean sector last year. Some are likening this rapid expansion to the telecommunications explosion from the ’80s.
By all means, this is not a comprehensive list — hundreds of companies fit the bill and may make excellent, long-term green investment choices. However, this collection of companies offers a glimpse into the broad variety of green investing. As always, please consult with your financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
the big boys
Here are some ideas from the ranks of the larger, more established companies. You may be surprised at some of the entries on this list as they are typically associated with being the problem rather than the solution. However, regardless of a company’s past, the evidence is overwhelming that the need for environmentally friendly products/services are taking over the markets. These established companies are definitely positioning themselves for the long-term in this arena.
URS Corp (URS)
URS is one of the nation’s largest engineering and construction firms with nearly 30,000 employees. While the company operates in a variety of construction-related capacities, serving government and private clients, a recent acquisition may have URS seeing green. On May 28, 2007, URS announced it would pay $2.6 billion in cash and stock to acquire Washington Group International. Washington Group has a particular knack for securing environmental construction and engineering projects — specifically, a $550-million contract with Allegheny Energy with the aim of reducing 90% of the sulfur dioxide emissions from the plant, and another contract with FutureGen Industrial Alliance to provide support services for the development of a coal-fueled, near-zero emissions power plant. URS was interested in Washington Group’s ability to service the nuclear power plant industry, especially with a potential resurgence on the way. The combination of URS and Washington Group makes them one of the largest teams of nuclear scientists and engineers in the country.
General Electric (GE)
GE does more than make light bulbs and appliances. In fact, GE is so intent on making the most of the opportunities emerging in green investments that it has established a new corporate clean-up policy, dubbed “Ecomagination.” In 2006, GE invested more than $900 million in cleaner technology R&D and is aiming to up that budget to $1.5 billion by 2010. GE’s Ecomagination goals include increasing the sales of ecomagination-certified products to over $20 billion by the end of the decade. GE is also serving the industrial realm, providing emissions monitoring and control systems as well as wind turbines and clean coal systems. GE has a history of diverse business operations and is fully primed to be a major green player in the 21st century.
BP
It is hard to believe that a big oil company such as BP could be considered a player in this field. Well-publicized problems at facilities in Texas (resulting in 15 deaths) and Alaska certainly did nothing to add to BP’s green image. However, from an environmental investing standpoint, this attention may be just what BP needed to get its green initiatives into the mix. Internally, over the next five years, BP will be investing $350 million to reduce CO2 emissions by up to 1 million tons each year. BP is also one of the world’s leading solar companies and has teamed with The Home Depot to help bring its solar-power solutions to the market. BP also has its arms in the wind energy business and jointly owns a 22.5 MW wind power farm in the Netherlands. BP is also becoming more of an advocate in things such as natural gas, hydrogen powers, and actively markets its crystal clear, more environmentally friendly gasoline. BP realizes the importance of environmental sustainability and the need to diversify its product line into cleaner energy avenues.
the little guys
The following smaller companies offer greater rewards, but at a much higher risk. They are focused on alternative energy practices, critical to being green. Being smaller, these companies could post big gains if sales take off and their products materialize.
Tower Tech Holdings Inc. (TWRT)
Tower Tech is the only company that is exclusively dedicated to producing the structures and towers for wind power energy. With over 700,000 square feet of manufacturing space, Tower Tech is counting on the fast-growing windmill trend to continue. The cost of wind power is 80% less than what it was 20 years ago, and recent comprehensive reports have suggested that the production potential of wind power is over 40 times as much as the world’s current electrical usage. Tontine Capital Partners, a very reputable hedge fund, invested over $15 million in early 2007 in exchange for more than 25% of Tower Tech.
Ascent Solar Technologies Inc. (ASTI)
Photovoltaics — or PV — is a technology that uses solar cells to convert sunlight directly into energy. Ascent Solar Technologies has developed its own technology and is making its own products for both commercial and residential applications in this field. The company thus far has had limited success selling its development -stage product line, but Norsk Hydro — one of the world’s largest energy corporations — thought it was worth forking over $10 million to Ascent to own about 25% of the company. Ascent has also been the recipient of several accolades, including research contracts from the U.S. Air Force.
Hoku Scientific, Inc. (HOKU)
Hawaii-based Hoku Scientific takes a different angle on the solar-power industry. Hoku manufactures and supplies the materials and components used in building things like solar panels, particularly the material polysilicon. Two recent deals have sent their stock soaring from $3 to $12 per share: A seven-year deal with Solar-Fabrik AG for up to $185 million of polysilicon, and a $678-million 10-year deal with Suntech Power Holdings Co. Ltd. to deliver the same material. These two agreements account for why Hoku has seen a sudden market spike.
CECO Environmental Corp. (CECE)
CECO Environmental is perhaps the least exciting of the bunch, but may be the most stable. CECO has been around for over 40 years, providing clean air solutions and engineering services and products to its customers. Its product line includes things like ventilation systems, dust collections, energy management, and related engineering and installation services. Company’s CEO and founder Phillip DeZwirek has commented that “the industry’s awareness of the need to improve indoor and outdoor air quality has resulted in an increasing demand for CECO’s all -encompassing environmental solutions and products.” Thus far, the company has impressed investors and consumers alike. In 2006 net sales increased 66% and the company sported a profit of $3.1 million (compared to a loss of $435,000 in 2005). CECO’s belief in growth is reflected in their compensation structure: DeZwirek earns no salary and seems to be banking on his 14% stake in the company to bring home the bacon, so to speak.
mutual funds & etfs
If you’re uncomfortable with the risks of stocks and prefer to have a money manager screening for solid companies that meet your green criteria, consider a mutual fund that focuses on green investing or an energy-related index fund or exchange traded fund (ETF). These investments offer diversification by investing in a myriad of socially responsible investments without the risk associated with being fully invested in a single stock or company.
Green Century Mutual Funds
According to their company motto, Green Century Funds aims to “put your money to work for cleaner air, water, and a healthier planet.” Green Century offers two funds: The Green Century Balanced Fund (GCBLX) and the Green Century Equity Fund (GCEQX). The Balanced Fund finds its own mix of environmentally friendly companies and buys their stocks and bonds. Over the past 10 years, the Balanced Fund has returned an average of 7.5% each year, returning 12.7% in 2006. Green Century seeks out companies that make and market products that aim to enhance the environment, maintain clean environmental records or have active corporate responses to environmental issues. Johnson & Johnson and Emerson Electric Company are two of the fund’s larger holdings
Domini Funds
Domini, like Green Century, has its own line of funds that invest in socially responsible companies. The Domini family of funds is far more extensive than that of Green Century. Domini maintains separate funds for its flagship Social Equity Fund (DSEFX) and other targeted areas like Europe (DEUFX), Asia (DPAFX) and a bond fund (DSBFX). The Social Equity fund is the largest by far with over $1 billion under management. The Domini 400 Social Index (DS400), which is considered the benchmark for socially responsible investing, was created partially by Amy Domini, founder and CEO of Domini Funds, and research firm KLD. Companies that have too much involvement in commodities like alcohol, tobacco, gambling, and firearms are not included in the DS400. Since inception of this index in 1990, it has returned an average of 12.1% per year, slightly outperforming the S&P 500 over the same duration.
PowerShares WilderHill Clean Energy (PBW)
This is not a mutual fund, but rather an exchange traded fund. PBW was recently featured in a Motley Fool article called “7 Ways to Win With Energy.” This ETF, which is based on the WilderHill Clean Energy Index, has been on a steady increase in 2007, up 31% year-to-date and 89% since inception in August 2004. It invests in companies that stand to benefit as our society moves towards cleaner energy usage and conservation. 80% of this ETF’s assets are invested in the common stock of companies that advance such technologies. It is a pretty large focus on a single group and certainly non-diversified, but if you want green, it doesn’t get much greener than this. Evergreen Solar, First Solar, Inc. and FuelCell Energy are a handful of the companies represented in this particular ETF.
it’s not easy being green
With so many large- and small-scale companies jumping on the green bandwagon, choosing which to invest in is no easy task. But if environmental issues are high on your priority list and you have money to invest, it’s worth looking into the myriad of options available to you. And the above suggestions really are just the tip of the iceberg. So go green, and get some green while you’re at it.
Resources:
www.urscorp.com
www.forbes.com
www.ge.com
www.bp.com
www.stanford.edu
www.hokuscientific.com
www.cecoenviro.com
www.greencentury.com
www.domini.com
www.kld.com
www.wildershares.com
www.fool.com
http://investor.wgint.com
www.towertechsystems.com
www.gwec.net
www.sec.gov
www.ascentsolartech.com
Source: http://ca.askmen.com/money/investing_150/185_investing.html
Recent Comments