I

Pale 4-'Ibe Dally Iowan-Iowa City, Iowa-FrIday, Aprf114, 1m
lewpoln s
Friday,
'EleCtrical
Cogeneration
The extremely mean weather of the winter just ended and
its effects on energy supplies are being used to promote
wasteful and possibly dangerous energy sources.
However, little is ever said about energy conservation or, if
it is said, it comes down from the highest priests of the energy
giants tellings us to turn out our lights and drive slower.
Conservation of energy is given the short shrift. Supposedly,
if we do much more than turn off our lights, the days of the
Grea t Depression of the 1930s will be back with us.
But a dirty little secret should be let out of the bag. It is just
not so. West Gennany, Switzerland and Sweden all live at
about the same standard of living as the United States but
they do it by using only half as much energy per person as we
use. One of their best energy conservation methods is
cogeneration. ,
Electrical cogeneration involves saving the waste heat
power plants produce and using it again. West Gennany
supplies about 12 per cent its electrical needs by
cogeneration. Electrical cogeneration can be used two ways:
One way is to use steam from large central power plants at
industrial sites near the power plant. The second method uses
smaller local power plants right at the industrial site. The
second method is being used here in the United States now in
such energy-intensive industries as oil refining and paper
making.
Both methods have drawbacks. Wit/! the first, and industrial
site must be nearby that has steam requirements
similar to the amount being saved by the power plant. The
second method goes totally against the trend toward large,
centralized power plant construction.
Utility's construction plans ~re calling for these large,
central power plants to be located away from major con·
centrations of people and industry. The economies of scale of
power production many times dictate the use of large power
plants. It is cheaper ~ produce large amounts of electricity
than small amounts.
Other drawbacks to cogeneration are electrical rates and
the cheap price of energy in general. Most electrical utility
rate structures are set up on the principle that the more
electricity a customer consumes, the lower the per unit rate.
Cogeneration is a way of sa ving energy, but if there is no
incentive to save energy (conserve), little conservation
(saving) takes place. In fact, our cheap energy prices may
well be at the heart of our energy problems.
For instance, think of cogeneration as a technological
II innovation (which it is). All Dr. Kenneth F.E. Watt of the
University of California-Davis says: "You don't need
technological innovation if everything is so cheap you don't
need to be efficient."
Because energy is traditionally more expensive in the
European nations than it is here in the United States, they are
under much more pressure to come up with innovations that
are energy-efficient. We have just begun to experience that
type of preliSure.
Should wI go a route emphasizing solar energy and conservation,
cogeneration will fit in perfectly. One possible
solar energy technology is biomass. This involves growing
plants that are harvested and mulched to produce methane, a
major constituent of natural gas.
The methane can then be burned as natural gas for a power
plant or used directly to fuel furnaces and other heating
systems. Because no energy generating system is 100 per
cent efficient, the waste heat can be saved and used again.
Besides stretching current energy supplies as all energy
conservation methods can, cogeneration is a painless way of
reducing the impact energy generation has on the environment.
Also, cogeneration, along with other energy
conservation methods, can lessen our dependence on
dangerous energy sources such as coal and nuclear power.
To bring about an increasing use of cogeneration, smaller
power plants buill in areas of industrial concentration must
be emphasized. Also, electrical rate structures that encourage
conservation must be implemented. These rates
would be set on a inverted rate structure: that is, the more
electricity that is consumed, the higher the rate per unit that
is charged. As mentioned earlier, this is the opposite of most
current utility rate structures.
Say the United States goes the cogeneration route: what
can be expected? The California Energy Commission found
that cogeneration would supply 140 billion kilowatt hours of
electricity per year for California alone - roughly equal
to California's total electrical usage in 1975. (A kilowatt hour
is the amount of time it takes to consume one kilowatt of
electricity. It need not be one hour long.) The California
figure is probably overly-optimistic, but it shows that
cogeneration has strong potential.
But before we dream too much, we should realize
cogeneration's limits, which are mainly political and
economic.
Cogeneration is strictly a good short-tenn conservation
method available right now. Cogeneration does nothing about
making our energy resources and the wealth they produce
more accessible to the general public and less in control of
the large energy corporations and utilities.
Also, as of right now, cogeneration assumes that power
plants will be the main sources of electricity. Presently, most
power plants are fueled by dangerous substances such as
coal and nuclear fuel, or by sources controlled by the large
energy corporations, such as natural gas and oil.
But cogeneration will help conserve energy and make the
switch to sane, safe, renewable energy sources, such as solar
energy, easier to implement. In fact, as mentioned earlier,
cogeneration could easily become part of the energy picture
with solar energy.
Of course, cogeneration could just as easily be in the
pclture if we go the coal and nuclear route. However, this
seems unlikely because the coal and nuclear route emphasizes
an extremely energy-intensive economy with all its
inherent wastefulness and environmental degradation.
Cogeneration is just too sensible to be used in that insane
scheme.
As the Council on Environmental Quality, a presidential
advisory agency, said in Its 1971 report: "It behooves us to
achieve a greater measure of (energy) effiCiency and to use
renewable energy resources before the conventional fuels
are prohibitively scarce or high-priced."
JOHN PAUL DORNFELD
Staff Writer
Readers: War resistance, libe~ation, .
Survival strategy
To the Editor:
On April 17, the U.S. Government collects its
money for war. Faced with the largest military
machine humanity has ever known, those who
oppose this expenditure for killing use a variety
nf approaches. One of them is war tax resistance.
Another is demonstrating against the war
machine at federal buildings across the country.
The Women's International League for Peace
and Freedom and the Catholic Worker are
planning legislative and direct actions in Des
Moines.
Two legislative bills are of importance. The
Transfer Amendment, to be introduced by
Parren Mitchell in the House and George
McGovern in the Senate, would transfer funds
from the military budget to areas of human
needs. Another pertinent piece of legislation is
the World Peace Tax Fund bill (H.R. 4897-5.880),
which would allow those conscientiously opposed
to war a legal alternative to paying war taxes.
The issue of war tax resistance must be seen in
the larger context of disannament. The
Mobilization for Survival, a coalition of groups,
is leading the na tionwide disarmament campaign.
Two actions deserve particular attention:
- Rocky Flats. Rocky Flats is where aU the
triggers for all the nuclear bombs in this country
are built. The state of Colorado has detennined
that the presence of highly radioactive material
llt Rocky Flats presents a clear danger to its
LIKED THE ~y. ~
workers and to the surrounding areas. But the
federal government must act if Rocky Flats is. t~
be closed. Accordingly, there will be a national
demonstration at Rocky Flats, April 29 and 30. A
bus will be leaving from Iowa; for local contacts,
call Free Environment at 35S-3888 or the Iowa
Socialist Party at 338-3061.
• - On May 27, the UN Special Session on
Disarmament will begin in New York City. Only
LeHers
--~--~----------~---- . ~-
two countries, both of them nuclear powers,
voted against the special session: The United
States and the People's Republic of China.
Because our nation is on record against this
discussion of disannament, it is crucial that all
thuse Americans who see disarmament as a
matter of survival, who are not hesitant to put
human values above those of property, who favor
funding human needs Instead of wa , tell our
government that we ' support this effort .
Accordingly, the Mobilization for Survival is
holding a mass rally in New York City, May ZT, to
support the Special Session and to tell our
gnvernJllent that we are in earnest about our
priorities: zern nuclear weapons; ban nuclear
InHMS! ')1 ANDm~ ~ ~Nlct
\ / ~st~!
/
April 14, 1978 Vol. 110, No. 182
Oplt.onI ."",... od on lit ... p ••",.tIl. opo ....... oItIlo ,.gned ..._a t""NY na4 n-*f be "-of ",.
DIJy '0•.,.
PuItIo_1I'I Stude,... PuItIoc.a'ona. ln