In June, Tesla’s Supercharger network passed a charging milestone, delivering more than 1 GWh of energy to Model S vehicles in a single month. That energy accounts for a collective 3.7 million miles driven, 168,000 gallons of gas saved, and 4.2 million pounds of carbon dioxide offset. That’s like driving to the moon and back seven and a half times, and nixing a day’s worth of CO2 from 73,684 Americans.
Tesla’s Supercharger network is now the largest fast-charging network on the planet. It’s also the world’s fastest-growing charging network.
At a Supercharger, Model S customers can get half a charge in as little as 20 minutes, and it’s totally free. Supercharger routes now span the entire width of the United States, from Los Angeles to New York, as well as up and down the East Coast and the West Coast. By the end of next year, 98 percent of the U.S. population will be within 100 miles of a Supercharger. We are also aggressively expanding the network in Europe and Asia. Last week alone, we opened eight new Supercharging sites in Europe, bringing the total number of stations on the continent to 32. We unveiled China’s first Superchargers in June and more are coming soon.
You can find a Model S charging at a Supercharger any given second of the day, and to date Superchargers have powered a total of 24.7 million miles of driving – which means the world has been spared the burning of 1.1 million gallons of gasoline.
For more details on the continued global expansion of the Supercharger network, visit www.teslamotors.com/supercharger.
Yesterday, there was a wall of Tesla patents in the lobby of our Palo Alto headquarters. That is no longer the case. They have been removed, in the spirit of the open source movement, for the advancement of electric vehicle technology.
Tesla Motors was created to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. If we clear a path to the creation of compelling electric vehicles, but then lay intellectual property landmines behind us to inhibit others, we are acting in a manner contrary to that goal. Tesla will not initiate patent lawsuits against anyone who, in good faith, wants to use our technology.
When I started out with my first company, Zip2, I thought patents were a good thing and worked hard to obtain them. And maybe they were good long ago, but too often these days they serve merely to stifle progress, entrench the positions of giant corporations and enrich those in the legal profession, rather than the actual inventors. After Zip2, when I realized that receiving a patent really just meant that you bought a lottery ticket to a lawsuit, I avoided them whenever possible.
At Tesla, however, we felt compelled to create patents out of concern that the big car companies would copy our technology and then use their massive manufacturing, sales and marketing power to overwhelm Tesla. We couldn’t have been more wrong. The unfortunate reality is the opposite: electric car programs (or programs for any vehicle that doesn’t burn hydrocarbons) at the major manufacturers are small to non-existent, constituting an average of far less than 1% of their total vehicle sales.
At best, the large automakers are producing electric cars with limited range in limited volume. Some produce no zero emission cars at all.
Given that annual new vehicle production is approaching 100 million per year and the global fleet is approximately 2 billion cars, it is impossible for Tesla to build electric cars fast enough to address the carbon crisis. By the same token, it means the market is enormous. Our true competition is not the small trickle of non-Tesla electric cars being produced, but rather the enormous flood of gasoline cars pouring out of the world’s factories every day.
We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform.
Technology leadership is not defined by patents, which history has repeatedly shown to be small protection indeed against a determined competitor, but rather by the ability of a company to attract and motivate the world’s most talented engineers. We believe that applying the open source philosophy to our patents will strengthen rather than diminish Tesla’s position in this regard.
Carvana Backs Tesla in Fight against Dealerships by Offering First Pre-Owned Tesla
Online Retailer to Bypass Middleman, Making Teslas Available to Consumers Nationwide
2013 Tesla Model S on Carvana.com Image courtesy of Carvana
ATLANTA, May 9, 2014 — Carvana, the first complete online auto retailer, announces the availability of its first certified pre-owned Tesla. The 2013 Tesla Model S is available for purchase on Carvana.com where interested buyers can take the electric car for a virtual spin, view high-definition 360 degree interior and exterior photos highlighting the vehicle’s state-of-the-art features.
2013 Tesla Model S on Carvana.com
The Tesla Model S is the first of several Teslas to be offered through Carvana.com, allowing car buyers to bypass long waiting lists in their home state. As the first online auto retailer to offer car buyers the ability to shop, finance and purchase Teslas 100 percent online, Carvana brings the benefits of its exclusive car buying platform to potential car owners nationwide. Through Carvana.com consumers can elect to have their vehicle shipped directly to their doorstep in as little as 24 hours or opt to pick up their purchase at the nation’s first car vending machine in Atlanta.
“We support Tesla in their fight to make direct-to-consumer sales a reality for consumers and are proud to offer their vehicles in a pre-owned capacity,” says Ernie Garcia, president of Carvana. “At Carvana, we know that navigating regulatory waters can be a difficult road to follow but we firmly believe that legislation should support, not stifle, innovation – especially when it comes to free enterprise and consumer choice.”
Due to high consumer demand generated by limited availability, retail prices for pre-owned Teslas are at an all-time high. Carvana’s initial Tesla offering retails for $88,000, offering consumers a significant savings against retail market average and comes fully covered by the Carvana Certified 100-day or 4,189 mile bumper-to-bumper warranty and a 7-day “test own” return policy. In addition to the Tesla Model S, Carvana’s inventory features a variety of hybrid and FLEX fuel vehicles for consumers seeking environmentally-friendly options at various price points.
About Carvana
Based in Phoenix, Ariz. and operating out of Atlanta, Ga., Carvana is the first complete online auto retailer that allows consumers to shop, finance and purchase a car entirely online, and have it ready for home delivery or pick-up at the nation’s first vending machine as soon as the next day. The company is backed by more than $1 billion in revenue and more than 20 years experience in the secondary car market. All cars available on Carvana.com come fully covered with a 100-day or 4,189 mile bumper-to-bumper warranty and a 7-day “test own” return policy.
Consumers once shopped predominantly at their local stores; but first mail order catalogs and today the Internet have created new ways to shop for and purchase a wide range of goods and services. Similarly, consumers once arranged for taxis by hailing one from a street corner or by calling a dispatcher; yet today, smartphones and new software applications are shaking up the transportation industry, creating new business opportunities and new services for consumers.
In buying cars, however, these new ways to shop may not be available to consumers. For decades, local laws in many states have required consumers to purchase their cars solely from local, independent auto dealers. Removing these regulatory impediments may be essential to allow consumers access to new ways of shopping that have become available in many other industries.
This very question has been raised across the country, as a still-young car manufacturer, Tesla, pursues a direct-to-consumer sales strategy that does not rely on local, independent dealers.
In this case and others, many state and local regulators have eliminated the direct purchasing option for consumers, by taking steps to protect existing middlemen from new competition. We believe this is bad policy for a number of reasons.
American consumers and businesses benefit from a dynamic and diverse economy where new technologies and business models can and have disrupted stable and stagnant industries, often by responding to unmet or under-served consumer needs. When that occurs in an industry long subject to extensive regulation, existing businesses—like automobile dealers—often respond by urging legislators or regulators to restrict or even bar the new firms that threaten to shake up their market.
Out of 15 million cars sold in the U.S. in 2013, Tesla accounted for a little over 22,000. This hardly presents a serious competitive threat to established dealers. What it could represent is a real change to the way cars are sold that might allow Tesla to expand in the future and prove attractive to other manufacturers, whether established or new ones that have yet to emerge, and consumers. Efforts to litigate, legislate, and regulate to eliminate Tesla’s perceived threat have forced it to battle jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction for the simple right to sell its automobiles directly to consumers.
When the automobile industry was in its infancy, auto manufacturers recruited independent, locally owned dealers to reach consumers in localities across the country. State laws progressively embraced wide-ranging protections for these dealers due to a perceived imbalance of power between the typically small local dealers and major national manufacturers. Dealers persuaded lawmakers that they needed protections from abusive practices by manufacturers. Federal laws, too, developed to protect auto dealers from abuse.
These protections expanded until in many states they included outright bans on the sale of new cars by anyone other than a dealer—specifically, an auto manufacturer. Instead of “protecting,” these state laws became “protectionist,” perpetuating one way of selling cars—the independent car dealer. Such blanket bans are an anomaly in the broader economy, where most manufacturers compete to respond to consumer needs by choosing from among direct sales to consumers, reliance on independent dealers, or some combination of the two.
Dealers contend that it is important for regulators to prevent abuses of local dealers. This rationale appears unsupported, however, with respect to blanket prohibitions of direct sales by manufacturers. And, in any event, it has no relevance to companies like Tesla. It has never had any independent dealers and reportedly does not want them.
FTC staff have commented on similar efforts to bar new rivals and new business models in industries as varied as wine sales, taxis, and health care. We have consistently urged legislators and regulators to consider the potential harmful consequences this can have for competition and consumers. How manufacturers choose to supply their products and services to consumers is just as much a function of competition as what they sell—and competition ultimately provides the best protections for consumers and the best chances for new businesses to develop and succeed. Our point has not been that new methods of sale are necessarily superior to the traditional methods—just that the determination should be made through the competitive process.
Change is a critical dimension of that competitive process. Manufacturers in a variety of industries now reach consumers directly through websites, providing extensive information that was once only available from dealers or by phone or mail inquiry. And consumers routinely turn to the Internet as a convenient way to comparison shop and buy products and services.
Such change can sometimes be difficult for established competitors that are used to operating in a particular way, but consumers can benefit from change that also challenges longstanding competitors. Regulators should differentiate between regulations that truly protect consumers and those that protect the regulated. We hope lawmakers will recognize efforts by auto dealers and others to bar new sources of competition for what they are—expressions of a lack of confidence in the competitive process that can only make consumers worse off.
Andy is the Director of the Office of Policy Planning, Debbie is the Director of the Bureau of Competition, and Marty is the Director of the Bureau of Economics. The views expressed are their own, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Commission or of any individual Commissioner.
BEIJING, April 23, 2014 — At the recent delivery ceremony of Tesla’s first batch of Chinese orders in Beijing, two PV charging systems caught the eyes of the guests. The system was requested by Tesla Motors, and designed and manufactured by Hanergy Solar Group. Hanergy thin-film flexible PV system was Tesla’s first choice for the first PV Supercharger station in China. Elon Musk, the founder of Tesla Motors, said at the ceremony, “In the future, Tesla will work with partners to build supercharger network. The first charging station in Beijing was built in cooperation with Hanergy Solar Group. Tesla will continue to invest in the construction of superchargers in China, aiming to quickly expand the network.”
Hanergy Solar Group will deliver two solar carports, each in Beijing and Jiading, Shanghai. The Beijing carport, a mobile carport designed to be assembled and transported, adopts Hanergy’s GSE flexible thin-film solar modules. The Shanghai carport will be a fixed structure, and adopts Hanergy’s MiaSole CIGS high-efficiency modules. The first phase of both carports has been completed.
In Elon Musk’s first interview on “Dialogue,” a China Central Television program, the American billionaire said that China is a key market and Tesla would make big investments in China, including investments in environment for charging, building seven super charging networks, and providing uninterrupted solar power supply 24 hours per day. The first batch of charging stations will be built up in cities like Beijing and Shanghai.
The PV charging system by Hanergy Solar Group protects vehicles like ordinary carports while converting sunlight into electricity utilizing its designated rooftop. At the same time, the system charges the electric vehicle through its energy storage system. The system uses the CIGS thin-film PV technology, the most advanced in the world. With conversion rates peaking at 20.5%, this technology offers light weight, flexibility, excellent low-light performance and advanced packaging. More importantly, no fixed column is required, which significantly reduces the cost. The carport is mobile, beautiful, modern in appearance, and a perfectly integrated to city surroundings, providing convenient and fast charging services to electric car owners.
Ms. Zhang Qingliang, Vice President of Hanergy Global Solar Power and Application Group said, “We are pleased to be the one to provide Tesla the first batch of solar powered Supercharging stations in China. As a technology-driven company, Hanergy has been actively exploring ways to utilize its thin-film photovoltaic technology to provide solutions through technological innovation and cross industrial integration. We have been working with multiple domestic and foreign automobile manufacturers to integrate solar, and is also researching on energy storage, photovoltaic car roof and other solar-automobile applications.”
In his interview, Elon Musk also stressed that the charging stations that Tesla is building in China can work 24 hours per day. Utilizing solar power and energy storage systems, the charging stations reduce the impact of electric coal on environment. The batteries are charged during the daytime with solar power; then can supply power for vehicles at night. In fact, under the double pressure of escalating oil price and increasingly strict emission standards, the electric vehicle industry has become a strategic industry all over the world.
Electric coal is currently the dominating source of energy. The EV industry still suffers from the traditional energy supply pattern. Combining the electric automobile industry and that of renewable energy, the cooperation between Tesla and Hanergy is an active practice towards cross-industrial technological innovation. It is a first step towards freedom from the traditional energy pattern and the plight of traditional fossil energy on which the current electric auto industry relies upon.
Since a successful Tesla is in the national interest, federal lawmakers would be wise to stop all this state auto dealership nonsense. The idea that Tesla cannot sell its electric cars in its stores in certain states is asinine. This issue is an obvious distraction for Tesla, with CEO Musk taking time to blog instead of innovate. There are already enough states with varying Tesla bans, making the situation ripe for federal law (restraint of interstate commerce).
A week ago, the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission banned Tesla from selling its cars in its Jersey stores. Tesla CEO Musk reached out to NJ in a blog post (3-14-14): “Our stores will transition to being galleries, where you can see the car and ask questions of our staff, but we will not be able to discuss price or complete a sale in the store.” Mr. Musk continued: “We are evaluating judicial remedies to correct the situation.”
Tesla tweeted (3-16-14): “Green River, UT is now Supercharged, making over 80 Superchargers in the US alone. See where you can charge for free: http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger.” Progress! Tesla stock (TSLA) closed today at $240.04 per share. The 52 week high is $265.
US Oil Angst
Clearly, anti-Tesla auto dealers would prefer to nail the country to an oil import tanker before letting Tesla revolutionize the auto business. What do federal lawmakers plan to do when the shale oil fields peak? We’re spinning our wheels as a nation, consuming almost 19 million barrels of liquid fuels a day, still beholden to the world oil market and its many seedy players. The International Energy Agency (IEA) has estimated that conventional oil fields decline at about 6% post peak, and shale oil wells decline to a trickle after a few years of production. EOG Resources stated on its Q4 conference call that it is seeing a flattening of overall Bakken oil production.
North Dakota’s oil production remained approximately even in January, according to the latest release (3-15-14) from the North Dakota Department of Mineral Resources, which showed oil production at 28,926,977 barrels in January 2014 (933,128 barrels a day), up from 28,727,304 barrels in December 2013. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects North Dakota production to rise more significantly in coming reports from the state due to improved weather conditions.
Model S at Supercharger Photo courtesy of Tesla
The EIA expects overall US oil production to rise to 9.2 million barrels a day (mb/d) in 2015, up from present production of about 8.18 mb/d. US average annual oil production peaked in 1970 at 9.6 mb/d using conventional drilling methods. Prior to the coming peak in US oil production using fracking technology, the price of WTI oil will likely rise, anticipating the decline of shale oil fields. When the peak comes, federal lawmakers will scramble for solutions.
World Oil Angst
The International Energy Agency (IEA) raised its 2014 oil demand estimate slightly to 92.7 million barrels a day; the IEA sees a stronger worldwide economy ahead. Oil prices have been surprisingly tame in recent trade, given international tension over Ukraine. WTI oil is $99.4 a barrel and Brent $106.6. At the CERAWeek conference (3-4-14), Chevron CEO John Watson called $100 oil the new $20, lamenting the rising costs of producing oil.
Oil and War
Courtesy of EIA
Iraq remains one of the last places where large quantities of easy oil can be produced to increase world supply. In February, Iraq increased oil production significantly to 3.6 mb/d, up about a half million barrels, which took some of the edge off international tensions over Ukraine. Iraq’s Oil Minister Abdul Kareem Al-Luaibi hopes to reach 4.1 mb/d in production this year and export 3.4 mb/d. However, as the chart shows, Iraq has hardly been a long-term steady producer.
Conflicts within the Middle East never stop stunning the West. Libya’s oil production has dropped to a range of about 100,000 to 120,000 barrels a day, according to Libya’s acting Minister of Oil Omar Shakmak. The country’s prewar production was about 1.6 mb/d.
“American forces yesterday boarded and took control of a commercial tanker ship that was seized earlier this month by three armed Libyans, Pentagon Press Secretary Navy Rear Adm. John Kirby said in a Defense Department news release issued today.” – DOD (3-17-14)
The US Department of Energy (DOE) has decided to release 5 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), testing the SPR system in case of an oil disruption emergency. The winning bids for the oil were announced yesterday; Phillips, Shell, Exxon, Marathon and Mercuria were the buyers.
Petrobras Oil Expense Risk
Brazil’s state oil company, Petrobras (PBR), sold more debt on March 10, raising a whopping $8.5 billion. Despite being the world’s most indebted oil company, Petrobras can still sell debt with an investment grade rating. There is a lot of money and power riding on Petrobras, so rating agencies must be nervous about making the tough call. Petrobras had about $114 billion in debt at year end 2013, and the company does not expect to return to positive cash flow until 2016. PBR closed today at $10.56. A new 52 week low was made yesterday at $10.2, dangerously close to single digits.
Petrobras is the world’s best example of how oil is crowding out normal economic development. It will take a crisis to see real change.
Russia The Bear
Russia is the world’s largest producer of crude oil, averaging approximately 10.5 mb/d (10.51 in 2013), according to the Russian Ministry of Energy. While Europeans may fret about Russian gas and oil supplies, the US is most concerned about oil. Russia exports about 7.4 mb/d of liquid fuels (EIA 2012 est.) and has the power to shut down the world economy by withholding oil exports from the market. Iran does not hold such sway.
Senator John McCain stated on CNN (3-16-14): “Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country.” Senator McCain continued clarifying: “It’s a nation really only dependent on oil and gas for their economy.”
“Oil and gas revenues accounted for 52% of federal budget revenues and over 70% of total exports in 2012, according to PFC Energy.” – EIA Russia Analysis
Courtesy of EIA
About EV News Report
EV News Report is a community blogging website for electric vehicle and greentech enthusiasts, as well as peak oil activists. Please help accelerate the electric vehicle and greentech movements by submitting an original article to EV News Report by following the video instructions on the About tab.
The world is transitioning from the fossil fuel age to the clean electric energy era. Two major world emergencies are driving this change:
1. There are over 7 billion people on the planet according to the United Nations. Today’s worldwide economic growth is placing tremendous demands on the energy sector. Unfortunately, according to the International Energy Agency, approximately 80% of the world’s energy is derived from fossil fuels. Absent an energy revolution, climate research tells us that the planet will be significantly warmer and altered for future generations.
2. The oil market is expensive and fragile. The door is open to green alternatives; however, high oil prices may destroy the currencies of oil dependent nations before the EV and greentech revolutions have a chance to reach mass adoption.
San Francisco’s N Judah streetcar splits the City, running on the east-west axis. EV News Report took a quick 3 question survey of 50 Muni transit riders. This survey was composed of 26 females and 24 men, ranging in ages from 21 to 80, waiting at streetcar and bus stops, primarily in Cole Valley, San Francisco: 1. An electric streetcar and bus arrive at the same time heading to your destination (hypothetically), which would you choose to ride? 42 Streetcar, 8 Bus 2. Did you know that trolley buses and streetcars run on 100% renewable hydro power? 28 No, 22 Yes 3. Would you prefer to ride a 100% renewable powered vehicle? 50 Yes, 0 No
New Streetcar Decision
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) will be deciding on the next generation streetcar before the end of summer 2014, and the Agency (Muni) expects the new streetcars to start arriving in late 2016. SFMTA Spokesman Paul Rose would not say which companies were bidding, but he did state that four companies were competing. Mr. Rose added that the new streetcars and technology enhancements should significantly increase capacity and efficiency.
The SFMTA calls these modern streetcars, light rail, but we will stick with the common San Francisco term, streetcar. Riders of the N Judah that were interviewed around rush hour had some colorful language to describe these transit vehicles, none used the word, light. One elderly female rider was baffled as to why the SFMTA could not fix the rush hour capacity problem.
The SFMTA added express rush hour buses along the N Judah route in recent years, but this fix is not satisfying for most; the majority of transit riders prefer the streetcar. The SFMTA would be wise to involve residents, particularly transit riders, in the procurement process. What’s on the streetcar menu? By serving transit cake, instead of packed sardines, the SFMTA can help its own policy, Transit First. Streetcar success can open more doors for San Francisco transit and renewable projects.
Follow that Tesla
To accelerate its drive to 100% renewable, San Francisco leaders need to study the Tesla playbook, starting at page one, great all-electric transportation. No, the City cannot simply float shares to build an electric empire, but it can tap a multitude of resources and willing partners that share a vision of a sustainable San Francisco. Tesla Motors has had no trouble getting people excited about the electric energy revolution, including some stock analysts that cover the company. Great products, the Model S and Supercharger, are the heart of Tesla, but the soul is the company’s vision, to move away from oil to all-electric transportation, to a sustainable world.
Tesla stock (TSLA) has rocketed higher (post Q4 earnings) due to a robust demand outlook for the Model S and X; the shares closed the week at $209.6 per share. On the Q4 conference call (2-19-14), CEO Elon Musk stated that he thinks it’s a good idea to raise additional capital, hinting about the funds required for a battery factory. Obviously, Tesla stock at its current price makes a great potential source of capital (secondary offering). CEO Musk added that he would elaborate on the upcoming battery factory (Giga Factory) plans next week.
“Even though there is zero marketing for the Model X, (pause). It’s like if you are going fishing, the fish are jumping in the boat. [Pause] We are not trying to sell the Model X at all, but the demand seems to be remarkably high.” – CEO Elon Musk
Success feeds success at Tesla.
Goodbye to Oil
With oil scarcity and climate change being major worldwide concerns, San Francisco leaders will have little trouble convincing many residents to ditch gasoline powered cars. The City could help the cause by making it more expensive to own and operate an internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle, and take back much more roadway for transit, electric vehicles, biking, running and walking. The oil market does not care about San Francisco or its bond rating, but the next mayor of San Francisco will be forced to deal with the oil market, barring a geological or technological miracle.
San Francisco will fare better than most major cities in this era of peak oil, due to its condensed size and affluence, making alternatives to the internal combustion engine somewhat easy. Legislative Aide Jess Montejano (Supervisor Farrell’s Office) said that Supervisor Farrell does not support congestion charges, preferring improved transit options and market dynamics to move people from (ICE) cars to alternatives. Mr. Farrell is one of the leading political voices in San Francisco today.
In the shale oil patch in North Dakota, oil production numbers from the North Dakota Department of Minerals Resources showed a slight drop from November to December, from 29,293,592 barrels to 28,620,049. The natural decline of the existing oil wells and cold weather halted the shale oil miracle in North Dakota. At some point, not that far down the road, the barrel numbers will peak and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil will go for a ride. WTI oil currently trades at about $102 per barrel.
The 49 all-electric trolley bus splits the City, running on the south-north axis. “With 52 percent of its bus and rail fleet composed of zero-emission vehicles, Muni accounts for 17 percent of all trips made in San Francisco, but only 1 percent of total citywide greenhouse gas emissions.” – SFMTA 2013 Annual Report
Clean Renewable Powered Transit
San Francisco’s all-electric streetcars and all-electric trolley buses are powered by 100% clean renewable Hetch Hetchy hydro energy, making these vehicles the smartest green choice on rails and wheels for City transit riders. Yes, the famous San Francisco cable cars are powered by Hetch Hetchy electricity as well, but most locals refrain from indulging in the cable car pose, leaving that to the hordes of tourists.
These public transit EVs do not have the same acceleration nor low drag coefficient of a Tesla Model S, but they are environmentally friendly, convenient and move a lot of residents and tourists from point A to point B, every single day.
Overall, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s (SFMTA) average daily ridership is about 704,000, which is an incredible statistic considering that San Francisco has a total population of 825,000. According to SFMTA Spokesman Paul Rose, about 400,000 take the bus (trolley, biodiesel, and hybrid) and about 300,000 take rail (streetcar and cable car).
SFWPS at 525 Golden Gate, LEED building. One hundred years ago, construction began on the Hetch Hetchy water reservoir and power project, initialized with a railroad extension to the Yosemite site in order to carry materials from San Francisco. The first electric power services started as early as 1918; O’Shaughnessy Dam was completed in 1923; and the first Hetch Hetchy waters flowed to San Francisco in 1934.
San Francisco Water Power and Sewer
It is San Francisco Water Power and Sewer (SFWPS) that proudly manages the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power Project, which brings clean water and power to the City from its reservoir and hydro power systems that initiate at Yosemite. SFWPS Director of Communications Tyrone Jue has been thinking of marketing ideas to best capture this clean renewable energy image on transit EVs, which would help direct attention to the City’s ultimate goal of becoming 100% renewable.
Today, the Hetch Hetchy power project generates about 200 MW on average, with a maximum capacity of 400 MW. On an annual basis, it generates about 1.7 billion kilowatt hours (SFWPS), providing power to San Francisco facilities and services: SF Airport, SF General Hospital, SF Municipal Transportation Agency (MUNI), SF Police Department, SF Fire Department, City tenants, Hunters Point Shipyard and Treasure Island.
“San Francisco consumes about 6,000 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity annually, with a peak load of roughly 970 MW.” – San Francisco Department of the Environment Danielle Murray (100% Renewable Task Force).
Driving to 100% Renewable
The California drought reminds us that hydro power can fluctuate significantly and that it’s important for the City to exploit a multitude of renewable options, including battery storage. In recent years, SFWPS has expanded into solar (7.5 MW) and biogas (3.1 MW) as well, and is looking to add more. Altogether, SFWPS provides about 17-18% of San Francisco’s electric energy, and its portfolio is all renewable (Tyrone Jue).
Of course, greater energy efficiency and distributed energy uptake are basic San Francisco Department of the Environment goals that should not be minimized, helping residents and businesses go green. Distributed energy is the most likely technological winner in the long-term.
On average, California gets about 15% of its electric energy from hydro, with the spring and early summer being the highest hydro periods due to snowmelt; however, electric energy demand is highest in the summer when Californians turn on the air conditioners. San Francisco’s summer weather is quite the exception with its mild climate; some would call the City’s summers foggy and cold, but to San Franciscans that’s home.
San Francisco Wind Energy Diversification
One longtime San Francisco resident, waiting for the N Judah streetcar, put it succinctly: “Anybody that has lived in this town knows about the wind.” Pacific Ocean offshore winds are a huge potential source of renewable energy, but most West Coast offshore locations are too deep for ocean anchored/bedded windmill designs. However, the relatively shallow waters around the Farallon Islands (27 miles to the west of San Francisco) have potential, according to Stanford University researchers in a 2009 study.
US Fish and Wildlife Refuge Manager Gerry McChesney said that the Farallon Islands are a fantastic nesting ground for seabirds, with thousands circling in the air at times. Stanford University wind researcher Michael Dvorak (now at Sailor’s Energy) was somewhat pessimistic about the chances for an offshore wind project near the Farallon Islands due to environmental concerns. After sailing around the Farallones, Mr. Dvorak said the pristine environment made an impression on him. He thinks that Cape Mendocino has the best characteristics for a major California offshore wind project due to the persistently strong winds and relatively shallow waters. Mr. McChesney concurred that Cape Mendocino is extremely windy! He recalled an aerial survey that he did of the area in a small twin engine plane with brutal winds.
Stanford Professor Marc Jacobson (Civil and Environmental Engineering) said that San Francisco could potentially run an underwater cable to a Cape Mendocino wind project, but that cable would be expensive. He thinks floating wind projects might be more plausible, if engineered correctly for storms. On the phone, his voice was hoarse after lecturing the next generation of solar and wind experts (environmental engineers) at Stanford, so he directed me to the Stanford SWEP website to learn more about their projects. Lastly, he added that some of his students had worked with the San Francisco Department of the Environment looking for suitable locations for windmills within the City. You can explore more on this topic on the Department of the Environment’s website: here.
About EV News Report
EV News Report is a community blogging website for electric vehicle and greentech enthusiasts, as well as peak oil activists. Please help accelerate the electric vehicle and greentech movements by submitting an original article to EV News Report by following the video instructions on the About tab.
The world is transitioning from the fossil fuel age to the clean electric energy era. Two major world emergencies are driving this change:
1. There are over 7 billion people on the planet according to the United Nations. Today’s worldwide economic growth is placing tremendous demands on the energy sector. Unfortunately, according to the International Energy Agency, approximately 80% of the world’s energy is derived from fossil fuels. Absent an energy revolution, climate research tells us that the planet will be significantly warmer and altered for future generations.
2. The oil market is expensive and fragile. The door is open to green alternatives; however, high oil prices may destroy the currencies of oil dependent nations before the EV and greentech revolutions have a chance to reach mass adoption.
