On Race to Save the Planet, the gentle art of energy conservation. It's not as bad as you think. Conservation, we heard, was freezing in the dark. There couldn't be anything farther from the truth. We're hooked on fossil fuels, causing acid rain, greenhouse warming, and smog in cities.
All over the world, using less and switching to alternatives makes environmental sense. But does it make financial sense? What's really going to convince people that they can get more for less?
Major funding for Race to Save the Planet is provided by the Annenberg CPB Project and public television viewers. Corporate funding is provided by Ocean Spray. Our continuing aim is to preserve and protect what we cannot create. Additional funding is provided by Jesse Smith Noise Foundation, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and Carnegie Corporation of New York, and by the following.
Oh Remember the energy crisis of the 70s? You couldn't get gas for the car and our whole world seemed to be falling apart. But then the crisis passed and it was back to business as usual. Well, we've got another energy crisis right now. too much of a particular kind of energy, fossil fuels like oil, coal, and gas.
All over the world burning fossil fuels is causing environmental havoc. Acid rain, smog in cities, we're even warming up the climate. the global climate with the greenhouse effect. We're talking a lot about these problems in other parts of the series, but this episode is devoted to one thing, breaking our addiction to fossil fuels. It's an enormous challenge because our whole way of life depends on them.
Heating our homes, powering our factories, running our cars. So how can we do it? Well, we may have uncovered the secret back in the 70s. The Persian Gulf, source of about half the world's oil.
When politics interrupts the flow, as it so often has, there's no better proof of how hooked we are on fossil fuel. Transportation consumes 4 million tons of oil a day worldwide, and for many people, if they can't drive, they can't live. In 1973, and again in 79, Middle East politics pushed the cost of oil to unprecedented heights.
But around the world, this economic shock was to provide a highly effective catalyst for change. At Volvo Cars in Sweden, they suddenly realized that their very existence was threatened. Vice President Dan Verbin.
All of us, we were kind of shocked after the first oil crisis. All of a sudden, we couldn't move around freely. And therefore, we felt, as a car manufacturer, what could we do from a technical point of view to really provide a vehicle that would be able to that brought down the energy consumption to a minimum. And then we felt we are in the car business, we want to stay there, even if energy gets even scarcer than today. CHARLES RADERMANN, Charged with the task of keeping Volvo in the car business was Rolf Melda.
Now retired, in 1979, he was one of the company's top designers. His instructions were simple, design a realistic, saleable car that used the least amount of energy possible. Rolf Melda had no illusions about what he was taking.
taking on. Maybe you could say that it was a dream project. But in the other hand, it was a dream that had to be... realized in three running prototypes after three years'time.
And that's really hard work. Milda and his team started by tackling weight. A lighter car takes less energy to move it.
Every component had to be rethought. In fact, the car came to be known as the Light Component Project, the LCP. Even today, several years after the development project, these Volvo workers are impressed by typical LCP.
components. It's the first time they've seen standard parts like engine blocks and wheels made from very lightweight materials, magnesium, aluminum or plastics. This is one of the wheels to the LCP. Extraordinary light.
I can lift it with one finger. Compared with an ordinary steel wheel, that I hardly can lift. It's absolutely incredible what you can do with lightweight material.
Engines were next. Many types were analyzed, both for good fuel economy and for ability to meet California's emission standards, the most stringent in the world. Finally, we ended up with the Elspet three-cylinder direct-injected diesel.
Made by a small family-run engineering company in Germany, this highly tuned diesel produced power comparable to the best gasoline engines, yet was extremely fuel efficient in the process. As the car came together, new modular assembly techniques were worked out. They saved energy and were more satisfying for workers as well. Some of these concepts were later integrated into Volvo's newest assembly lines.
The new lightweight structure was put through extensive crash tests. The company was not prepared to meet energy and performance goals, only to sacrifice safety. The LCP is, from the safety point of view, as good as any other Volvo car that has been produced. After three years of intensive development, the LCP was ready to be unveiled to the world. The car is a subcompact with a large luggage compartment and adjustable pedals, seat and steering.
Two extra passengers can ride in the rear. Performance is excellent. Zero to 60 miles an hour in 11 seconds. Better than average. It meets the most stringent emissions and safety standards.
Fuel economy is unheard of, averaging 65 miles a gallon. At cruising speeds, Rothmelder's LCP achieves the dream figure of 100 miles a gallon. Over its lifetime, it's calculated the car would use just half the energy of the same size conventional car. That's 17 tons less carbon dioxide released to the atmosphere. But you cannot buy an LCP.
Only four were built. After it was developed, oil prices began to drop again. The company concluded that the car wouldn't sell.
And this is driven very much by the energy prices. So we do not have the market demand for this very, very low energy consumption. But we are prepared. The LCP story holds a lesson for the world's policy makers. If the right incentives exist, the marketplace alone can greatly reduce fossil fuel consumption.
A simple tax on oil or more stringent fuel economy standards would make the LCP and similar cars by other makers worth manufacturing. And many other energy-saving technologies are waiting in the wings. Some of those new technologies are inside this unassuming suitcase. Enough to save the energy from more than a hundred large power stations.
Handling the suitcase is the world's leading prophet of energy efficiency, Amory Lovins. When oil prices shot up, these kinds of things began to appear. This little suitcase contains samples of new kinds of electricity-saving technologies.
This is a... 11 watt lamp that replaces a 50. They come in various other sizes and shapes. It's got a special phosphor tuned to your red, green, and blue retinal cones in your eye, so it gives almost perfect color and it's very pleasant to work under.
Also, it doesn't get very hot. You can't do that with a regular light bulb. And it runs at very high frequency.
There's a little electronic ballast built in here, so there's no flicker and no hum. It also lasts about 13 times as long as a regular light bulb. everything a fluorescent lamp should have been.
The thing you do to most incandescent lamps is to replace them with compact fluorescent lamps. Lovins is an environmentalist, but the message he's bringing to these utility executives is economic. If they help their customers save energy, the utility saves money because it won't have to build more power plants.
The nicest thing about these is they last about 10,000 hours. Each item in the suitcase represents a huge potential for energy savings. A reflector on a compact fluorescent lamp, just 8.5 watts to replace a 75 watt flood.
An electronic ballast dims and brightens lights automatically. Savings from 50 to 90 percent. A new incandescent spotlight, just 20 watts to reach across an auditorium.
When you add up all of these new lighting saving devices and install them everywhere they fit, you end up getting nicer light, you see better by it, it's the same amount of light. we have now, but it uses only 8% as much electricity as now to do that job. This means we would replace 120 huge power plants, and also we'd save $30 billion a year in operating costs.
And it's not all lighting. There are new super-insulating windows. Microchips to control industrial motors.
Efficient shower heads that use 75% less hot water. Although these technologies... saved more money when oil was more expensive, they still do make economic sense.
Right now, Lovin's devices are hard to find, not impossible, like the LCP, but it's up to consumers to search for them, and that's a shame. because they make more than just economic sense. One compact fluorescent lamp, one super-efficient lamp over its life can avoid the release of about a ton of carbon dioxide and over 20 pounds of sulfur oxide, which causes acid rain.
So it can help protect the climate and the diversity and productivity of our forests and lakes. And not only that, but we make money on the deal. That is, we actually save money while protecting the environment instead of having to pay extra.
extra for environmental quality. Save the environment and make money too. A miraculous idea, but they know all about it in Osage, Iowa, population 3,800.
Osage is careful, conservative, not bowled over by newfangled ideas. Yet over the last 15 years, this town has become the energy conservation capital of America. Okay, who else has some ideas on how you can save energy? Yes, sir, young girl.
Before leaving the room, if you're watching television, turn the television off. Okay, that's a real good idea. Wes Birdzall is the head of Osage's public utility.
He's been the driver of the Osage's public utility for over a decade. driving force behind the town's efforts for energy conservation. This visit to a fifth grade class is just one of many programs which began back in the time of the oil crises, when just like Volvo, Birdsall was worried about the future. The oil bill was skyrocketing, and energy consumption was growing fast enough that expensive new generators like these would be needed soon.
Birdsall reasoned, rather than buying more oil and generators, it would be cheaper to enter that forbidding territory, conservation. Maybe we shouldn't even call it conservation, we should call it energy efficiency, because conservation, we heard, was freezing in the dark. There couldn't be anything farther from the truth.
Conservation or energy efficiency means being more comfortable at lower cost, and that's what we're trying to do. Now if you look through here again up along that wall there You'll see where the insulation is now, it isn't quite full between them two studs up in there. Bird's All's program took the message direct to his customers.
This energy survey using an infrared scanner is offered free. Right around the door and that part. Door on down. Telltale black areas around doors and windows reveal where heat is escaping to the outside. It gives homeowners a first-hand look at what they're losing.
A lot of money going out that wall right now. There is that's where a good job and a poor job insulation will really show up water heaters are often set unnecessarily high we like to have them set down around 115 to 120 it's a waste of energy and a scalding risk to simply turning it down 20 degrees will save the house 15% of its water heat water heater energy, about $25 a year. These free services were designed to show that there's a lot that can be done, like putting in water heater jackets, 17% less energy, $55 a year. $30 a year saved.
High-efficiency fluorescent bulbs, 75% less energy, $30 a year saved. Low-flow shower heads, 70% less energy, $115 a year saved. Slowly, the lesson began to sink in. There's been very definite change in people's attitudes. For a couple of years, people would come in and lay their bill on their counter up here and say, look at this ridiculous...
Bill, what are you going to do about it? It took two years before we started hearing people say, look at this ridiculous bill, can you come out and help me? When we heard that, we knew we were over the hill, so to speak, and education was finally taking hold. An educational newsletter is now mailed out to customers every month, and it's found a receptive audience.
Now people believe the utility is really on their side. It offers information and tips to motivate homeowners to keep on... doing things on their own. One of the most successful motivating ideas was an ambitious project to take infrared photographs of every house in town. In these pictures, the white areas indicate escaping heat.
Many houses seem bathed in an aura of lost heat and wasted dollars. The photographs were then mailed to every residence, and more than anything, this prompted people to invest in their own changes. Look at how loose it is.
This couple decided the expense of new windows was going to be worth it. Probably the thing that convinced us the most was a photo that we have that was taken by an infrared scanner. And as you can see, we do have a great loss in all of our windows.
And we knew then it was time to replace these windows. It's estimated that each year more energy flows out of the windows of American homes than flows through the entire Alaska pipeline. From windows to full-blown in-wall insulation to plugging up little leaks here and there, the whole town got busy.
Thank you. There are also five factories in Osage and West Birdsall has reached them all. This printing plant uses highly efficient motors to run the presses and highly efficient lighting.
Industry everywhere could get the same benefits. Here the results were so profitable that the company decided their new plant ought to be built in Osage as well, right next door. Commercial buildings are big energy users, and in Osage, things have been busy there, too. This market's owner is Everett Steele, who's enthusiastic about cutting his operating costs through efficiency. Lighting is usually the area with the greatest potential in the commercial sector, and today the utility is installing new efficient ballasts and fluorescent lamps throughout the store.
One month ago, new lighting was put into one aisle to compare with old lighting in the next aisle. So far, 968 kilowatt hours have been used by the old lights, compared with 831 for the new. To Everett Steel...
the choice was obvious we've had a 22 percent savings uh just in the last four weeks uh if i put these lights in the whole store over a period of a year i'll save about probably 800 to a thousand dollars a year and i think that's that's a well worth the installation of these of these Of course, refrigerators and freezers are big power consumers. And behind the scenes, the compressors give off a large amount of heat, which is often lost, but not in Everett Steel's store. Five years ago, I installed this system to recycle the heat, and before that, it was going to waste.
We now heat 20,000 square feet for less than $100 a month. Normally, this would cost us $600 a month, and that's quite a savings. So, between lights and refrigeration, Everett Steel is saving about $7,000 a year. But that's not his only interest. Another reason I've done it is to conserve on fossil fuel.
and by doing that we help improve the environment. But I think I see in the last, just the last couple years, a complete change in many of the people. They're thinking not of just conservation, just their pocketbook, but they are now thinking about the greenhouse effect, and people are concerned about the greenhouse effect. They are concerned about acid rain. They are concerned about this world and what's going to happen to their kids.
Osage is living proof that, as Amory Lovins says, you can save money while protecting the environment. The town now uses 25% less energy than the average, and it's financially better off. If the whole U.S. behaved like Osage, that would mean reduced acid rain and over half a billion tons less carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere each year.
This is the state of Karnataka in southern India. Here, as in many developing countries, it's the pattern of life in rural villages that governs how a large part of the country's energy is used. And in the villages, the biggest energy users are women. That's because they do the cooking.
Traditionally here, over an open fire. The first problem is that the smoke emitted is very unhealthy for the cook. And on top of that, the fires are fueled with wood or field waste, like straw, that the women have to constantly spend time gathering.
This non-commercial system offers as much potential for improvement as a utility-run system like OCE energy scientist Amulya Reddy. Half the energy that is used in India is from what we call non-commercial sources, firewood. And this firewood is used at very low efficiencies of about 9-10%. Whereas if we can increase the efficiency to 50-60%, then we can achieve our cooking with very much smaller amounts of energy. This is the beginning of a cooking stove which will perform that well.
The stove maker has been trained to build a design developed by Dr. Reddy and his colleagues to meet some specific goals. First, it must be cheap. so it uses mainly locally available bricks and clay. The few metal parts have been kept simple and cheap to make. For correct operation, dimensions and fit are critical, so the builder carefully tailors the stove openings to this particular woman's pots.
The final component, the chimney, will be appreciated the most by the cook. It will make the stove smokeless. Over about 250,000 stoves have been built and basically it has led to an improvement in the quality of life of the people who cook. These stoves are smokeless. permit shorter cooking times and there is also a saving of fuel.
Like conservation and Osage, the efficient stove brings several benefits. Healthier air in the house and the time needed to gather fuel greatly improves the quality of the food. reduced. The main benefit, cutting fuel consumption in half, is vitally important everywhere growing populations are putting increasing stress on natural resources.
But there is one fundamental difference between ocean Osage and here. This fuel is renewable, unlike the industrial world's coal and oil. Wood and straw are packaged solar energy that's used by plants as they grow. In the process they absorb carbon dioxide from the air.
When plants are burnt as fuel, the carbon dioxide is released again, but it will be reabsorbed in an endless cycle as long as trees keep growing and fields are replanted. That's why devices are so important. Developing countries with their renewable energy systems have so far contributed very little permanent carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. And it's only permanently released carbon dioxide that builds up in the atmosphere and causes the greenhouse effect. But the energy systems of the developing world are now changing rapidly.
Fossil fuels, especially the abundant coal in India and China, are being exploited on a grand scale to provide energy for new industries. So it's inevitable that as they industrialize, developing countries will contribute to the problem of the greenhouse effect. But that presents an opportunity.
They could jump directly to the most efficient energy technologies, like the ones used in Osage's shops, homes and factories. They'd save money in the same way, and the atmosphere would benefit as well. Dr. Reddy. The greenhouse effect has been basically caused by the industrialized nations, and the burden of tackling it is very...
much on them. However, if developing countries step up their energy consumption using old-fashioned obsolete methods, then they will also contribute to the deterioration. of the atmosphere.
However, there are other reasons why developing countries should go on an efficient energy path. It is to save capital and pursue a cheaper approach to energy. And if they do that, they will also contribute to a reduction of the greenhouse problem.
Renewable plants were used for energy long before fossil fuels. And more recently, other renewables have been developed. This solar solar panel, for example, generates electricity directly from the sun. Here it's used to charge batteries that at night will power street lighting.
Installed in this remote Indian village, far from any power lines, it makes sense. But solar electricity costs three times more than electricity from oil or coal-fired power stations. So it's only a potential replacement. Realizing that potential will take large investments in research, or a large increase in oil prices, or both.
Until then, solar electricity's only useful applications will be specialized ones like this. Vehicles generate 14% of the world's carbon dioxide, or CO2 emissions. Here too, renewable alternatives have potential. Ralf Melde explains.
If you are looking real seriously into the... environmental problems in the future. We have to have some reduction of the CO2.
And the only way to reduce the CO2 is either... by extraordinary low energy consumption. Secondly, using alternative fuels.
But renewable fuels need not be exotic. Corn oil, olive, sunflower. On the way home, Rolf Melda picks up one bottle of salad oil for the kitchen and two bottles of liquid solar energy, literally for the road. A startling feature of the LCP is its ability to use a variety of fuels. Diesel, diesel gasoline.
mixture, or vegetable oils. But for these fuels to be truly renewable, the entire system has to be considered. The corn or sunflower field has to be replanted, and the fertilizer used should not be made with fossil fuels, as they are usually.
In one place in the world, a renewable system has been tried. Brazil. The energy shocks of the 70s were severe.
In a country already burdened by debt, oil imports were taking half the available foreign currency. Not only was the fledgling domestic car industry threatened, the entire economy was at stake. As an alternative to gasoline, the government found its answer in alcohol, produced from Brazil's huge sugarcane crop.
The world's largest renewable fuel program was created. 90% of Brazilian cars sold in recent years run on alcohol, and a large domestic production and supply industry is in place. Just outside Sao Paulo, here at the university, the Dean, a former head of the nation's largest electrical utility, is José Goldenberg. He was an early supporter of alcohol fuel.
Well, the first benefit of the program is economic, in the sense that it liberates Brazil from spending much-needed foreign... hard currency. In the second place is the creation of jobs and the development of local technology. But foremost are the environmental aspects of the program.
One environmental gain is that alcohol burns much more cleanly than gasoline or diesel. Even though trucks and buses did not convert to alcohol, air quality in Brazilian cities has actually improved in recent years. That's why Los Angeles thinking of requiring conversion to alcohol fuel. The alcohol program achieved its narrow goal of saving foreign currency by replacing imported fuel with a domestic product. But alcohol is expensive, so for public acceptance, it needs a heavy government subsidy.
And just like the Volvo car, if oil prices are low, it's hard to justify a product designed to save oil. In sugar cane country 200 miles north of Sao Paulo, you can see another of the problems with the alcohol program. It takes up huge areas of prime agricultural land while elsewhere land-hungry settlers are rapidly destroying bridges.
Brazil's Amazon rainforest. But the advantage of sugar cane is that it's one of the world's most efficient users of sunlight. Each truck is in effect carrying a load of concentrated renewable solar energy. And recently Brazil has found a way to dramatically improve the energy yield that they get back from the cane.
At the alcohol factory, the cane is first crushed and ground. The extracted juice is fermented to produce alcohol, and the leftover pulp, known as bagasse, was always discarded as waste. But today, bagasse is finding new uses never originally anticipated, uses that are greatly strengthening the homegrown energy industry. José Goldenberg. The use of bagasse as a byproduct and a very valuable byproduct of the alcohol industry is broadening the base of the program because bagasse is used as a fuel to produce heat and also as a fuel to produce electricity.
San Martino is one of the country's largest alcohol factories and producers of bagasse. In 1976, they began to experiment with burning bagasse as a substitute for oil, producing heat and electricity for the country. for the factory.
Today, not only does Bagasse provide all the factory's electricity, but they're selling a two megawatt surplus to the public power company. In fact, 10% of Brazil's total energy is now coming from Bagasse. Ten years ago, the mills paid to have Bagasse hauled away. Today, they're selling it.
In effect, they've doubled the energy yield from a field of sugar cane. This truck loaded with potential electricity is bound for a local market. orange juice factory, Citrus Succo, the largest producer of frozen orange juice in the world.
While oil trucks were once a common sight here, today, bagasse meets most of the factory's energy needs. It takes 20 megawatts to power this enormous operation, enough for two towns the size of Osage. And most of it comes from sugar cane. At another factory they've worked out some other uses for bagasse. The raw bagasse first goes through a spectacular steam hydrolyzing process.
That breaks down the sugar cane fibers to make a high-quality cattle feed. When combined with this other alcohol product, high-protein yeast, the result is a cheap, well-balanced animal diet, easy to produce and potentially exportable to a world market. Brazil's alcohol and bagasse program is not entirely renewable.
Some oil-based fertilizer is used on the cane fields. But it shows that large-scale alternatives to fossil fuel systems are possible. Sugar cane.
yields a substantial energy gain, renewable solar energy that adds no permanent carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. And there may be another environmental benefit. Using sugar cane to produce electricity could reduce the pressure to build more large dams which are flooding the Amazon rainforest. The alcohol program could have a very important impact in the production of electricity in the country, lowering, therefore, the needs of new hydroelectric power plants.
which have very unpleasant environmental consequences in some areas in Brazil. It is estimated that 25% of the electricity consumed in Brazil in the year 2000 could come from the efficient burning of bagasse. Forty years ago, the alternative to fossil fuels was thought to be obvious.
Nuclear power. This marvelous new technology was going to provide energy in such abundance, it was said it would be too cheap to meter. Nuclear power has to go! But around the world, nuclear power has become controversial. There are problems with reactor safety, nuclear waste, and with expense.
It produces only 5% of the world's energy, and that's declining. Most current reactors generate electricity from steam that's produced using the tremendous heat of the nuclear reaction, a reaction that must be contained to be safe. The uranium reactor fuel is held inside long metal rods like these. They must get hot to generate steam, but never so hot as to melt and release the deadly radioactive materials inside.
Elaborate systems are supposed to guarantee constant fuel rod cooling, but at Three Mile Island in 1979, the cooling did fail. We have indications that there's some minor fuel failure in the reactor core. The damage was much greater than first suspected. The hot fuel rods had remained partially uncovered for 40 minutes, more than enough time for melting to occur.
Although some radiation reached the outside, most was contained within the building. This close call convinced some that nuclear power was too risky. Seven years later, the full-scale disaster at Chernobyl persuaded many more.
But if it can be made safe, nuclear power has big potential benefits. It releases no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, nor does it contribute to acid rain. Here in Jülich, West Germany, the small experimental reactor has been steadily and safely producing electricity for the past 20 years.
Its designers are confident it is inherently safe. Unlike Three Mile Island, they say, if it loses coolant, there will be no disaster. They'll demonstrate that today. It's a joint effort of West Germany and the United States.
Nuclear engineer Klaus Kruger devised the test procedures, and John Klaus Kruger devised the test procedures. Cleveland from Oak Ridge National Laboratories is observing. Almost everything about this reactor is unusual. Its key is the fuel.
It consists of millions of tiny uranium particles, individually coated with ceramic. Unlike metal fuel rods, the ceramic is very heat resistant. The reactor is kept small and the fuel particles are kept spread out. Helium gas is used to cool the fuel.
But even if the helium is completely cut off, This spread-out fuel can easily dissipate heat. The result is that it's impossible for the fuel to ever get hot enough to be damaged, in theory at least. But how about in practice? Final instructions. and then today we'll find out.
10 a.m., time to begin. The circulation fans are switched off. Most of the helium has already been removed from the system. Now the last available cooling has been shut down.
Fan speed steadily drops on the control panel. Within a few minutes, the engineers expect only the inherent cooling capacity of the fuel will be left. Zero revolutions on the circulation. fans. Eight minutes into the test, the temperature of the fuel, normally around 470 degrees centigrade, is now expected to rise.
Slowly, within the hour, it's up by 36 degrees. A worst-case nuclear accident, a loss of coolant, has now been deliberately simulated. The Hollywood film, The China Syndrome, shows what loss of coolant means with conventional nuclear technology. Look at this water level indicator.
Water level's low. If the fuel is exposed, there are a desperate few minutes to act before the rods melt. This says it's high.
Panic, confusion, critical decisions to be made. God, we're losing it. This is a chillingly accurate portrayal of the impossible demands that conventional reactor technology makes. This is Jack Goodell.
We have a serious condition. You get everybody into safety areas and make sure that they stay there. One hour into the German event, and it's time for coffee and cookies.
The only decisions here, one lump or two, chocolate or vanilla. And the engineers are quietly confident. John Cleveland.
The loss of coolant accident is the worst kind of accident that could possibly happen in a nuclear plant. We've got those conditions right now in the reactor, and we see that the temperatures are increasing. We'll monitor those throughout the night, tomorrow, the next day. We should see that they go up and then begin to come down and continue to come down and don't go anywhere near the temperatures that would cause damage to the fuel or release of radar activity. By late afternoon, as expected, temperatures have continued to rise slowly.
There's little to do but wait as the reactor handles the situation unaided. The inherent cooling abilities of the design should keep the situation entirely safe. Thirteen hours into the accident simulation, Temperatures have leveled off at about 830 degrees, a thousand degrees below the point where fuel damage could occur. Then, as night wears on, the temperatures gradually decline. Two days later, it's clear that the design has met expectations.
I think the test is a full success and we have demonstrated that our reactor can withstand this sort of accident without any damage. Our temperatures have come down significantly since they reached their maximum value as you can see. here, they've been decreasing at about two or three degrees Celsius per hour, and we feel this demonstrates the inherent safety of this reactor technology. Reactor safety is not the only issue with nuclear power. The whole industry needs to It needs tremendous security to guard materials that could make bombs, and to isolate nuclear waste for which, as yet, there is no agreed safe disposal method.
Over the years, nuclear power has turned out to be expensive too, and as yet, the costs of safe reactor technology are unknown. So it's likely that nuclear power's many drawbacks will continue to outweigh the advantages it has for the atmosphere. Bornholm Island in Denmark, home to 60,000 people, spread among five towns and about a dozen villages.
The people of Bornholm farm, they fish, and in summer they attend to the tourists attracted by the island's gentle beauty. Like so many people around the world, Bornholm was shocked to discover in the 70s their total dependence on imported oil. So they put together a plan to stop using oil within 30 years.
But that's still a long way off. Bornholm is showing how difficult it is to break free from oil. This morning, out to enlist support for the alternative energy plan is the head of the island's local government, Mayor Jens Brant.
The immediate issue is a new installation that will be voted on in a few days. a critical step for the mayor, who himself initiated the plan. The energy plan began after the two oil crises we had. Oil became expensive and it was hard times for the Bornholm community.
So we had to figure something out. With the economy in trouble, the mayor asked his environment and development director for advice. Energy self-reliance was Jan Jespersen's suggestion.
We looked around to see if we could find some interesting projects in this field. And, well, we have a lot of straw, manure and wood in this island. So why not try to put the things together and make some energy planning based on that? Bornholm has abundant renewable resources, but much of it, like pig manure, was regarded as waste. It was a nuisance, just like the surplus straw in the fields, and disposal was difficult.
Exploiting waste for energy could... solve several problems at once. So things fit into each other. So we could make energy planning, we could improve the environment, we could get more employment, and we could have a better local economy.
As well as agricultural wastes, there was another renewable resource. which Bornholm enjoys in abundance. The island lies out in the Baltic, 20 miles from the mainland, so it's a windy place. Denmark has some of the best windmill technology in the world.
There are now 42 windmills on Bornholm. Since 1986, windmills have taken over 2% of Bornholm's electricity. But around the world, wind energy is negligible.
Like the Volvo car, windmills are not worth building if oil prices are low. And right now, they can only compete in high wind areas like Bornholm. Here, this windmill is supplying about 50 local houses.
But even on Bornholm, the wind only blows some of the time. So right from the start, the aim was to develop several different new energy sources. Oil for heating used to provide 25% of Bornholm's total energy.
But the energy plan suggested another approach. Burn straw in factories, like this one, to heat entire districts. Each year, two percent of the total energy is used to heat the entire district.
2,000 tons of straw, formerly burned in the fields, are used here to heat water for local houses. The plant has done everything expected of it, made use of agricultural waste and replaced 800 tons of oil. a year. It has, however, been a financial disaster.
In 1986, soon after operations started, world oil prices plunged. So heat generated from straw suddenly costs more, not less, than heat from oil. The island government was in a bind. It had promised the system's users that they would never have to pay more for straw heat than for oil. So the 106 houses connected to this system must now receive a subsidy.
Homeowners like the compact installations that have replaced their old oil burners. But if the units were costing more to run, they wouldn't be tolerated for long. Even if oil prices had not dropped, there were no strong financial incentives for industry like this dairy to support alternative energy projects. While the national government places a high tax on oil for domestic use, industry is...
exempt from the tax. The result for the dairy, oil is much cheaper than energy from straw. If you want industry to commit to some shared heat system in local local areas. The only thing to do is for the national government to get into it and make over the energy tax system that we have here in Denmark.
It has to be just as advantageous to heat with straw as oil, which it isn't under the present tax system. So to replace oil with renewables, Bornholm has to contend with a tangled tax system and seesawing oil prices. New and unproven technologies must be mastered as well.
In spite of these difficulties, the local government is pressing ahead. head. Greater efficiency in using their renewables would help to be more competitive with oil, and that might be possible. The most efficient use of renewables would be to use cogeneration, that means combined production of heat and electricity. And there we could use both straw, we could use wood and manure.
Thank you for watching. In another part of Denmark, a pilot cogeneration plant is already at work. Known as a locus unit, it takes advantage of both wind and farm wastes. Pig manure is trucked in from local farms and used to produce natural gas, methane, in these digester tanks. The methane can power an electrical generator or produce heat or both.
The windmill provides electricity. if it's windy. It's a technically sophisticated system that juggles wind and gas to provide the changing proportions of heat and electricity needed in the local village. The locus units are in theory a efficient enough to compete with oil at current prices. Back on Bornholm, Akegabu is the town that will vote on the first of the island's proposed locust units.
It'll mean committing significant local funds and then asking the national government to contribute as well. Most residents in town are probably in favor, because they support the idea of the energy plan. If the plan is going to be a success, then it's extremely important for us that the locust plants are going to be built.
The mayor, in last-minute efforts, is visiting farmers who are divided on the matter. They hold a critical vote and have their own concerns. The expense of keeping this long road clear in winter so maneuverable manure can be trucked to the locust plant is worrying this dairy farmer.
I need to cover my costs for the road and on top of that we think that when we deliver manure for the biogas plant we should get a price for it, which is in the proposal. Changing the way things are done is never easy. For Mayor Brandt, changing energy systems is proving extraordinarily difficult.
He has to cope with everything from national tax policy to the price of the land. price of cow manure. This plan, this project, I think is a good idea.
It's a very good idea, but there are still problems in it and I'm worried about it. It's going to cost me too much money. So for the time right now, I'm not going to go into it.
The evening of the vote. Tonight, Akegabu's town council has to decide whether or not to support the acquisition of a locus unit. Will they be willing to commit about seven and a half million dollars of local funds to the project? It's a critical decision for the future of the energy plan. If they lose here, they'll be stalled at the 15% of the island's energy that renewables provide so far.
First, there's a presentation in favor by the council. leader. Then individual members make their statements.
This Social Democrat sees advantages to a large project here on the island. It could promote jobs and cut back dependence on oil. He recommends a vote in favor. Most comments are favorable, although some of the expected objections are voiced as well. From other biogas projects currently running, we know that there are there are smell or odor problems in the city, and that there's a lynch mood in the town when the wind comes from a certain direction.
There's also a general sense of nervousness about scarce local funds. It's a big mouthful for the town to enter such a large project, but it's also exciting. We can use our own island products.
Finally the vote is called for. It doesn't look like a coincidence. As the council members rise, it's clear the decision is unanimous to approve the expenditure. The months of hard work by Yarn Yes Person and the mayor have paid off. The town found it was worthwhile to overlook many individual concerns.
in favor of a solid commitment to the energy plan. I am very happy about the vote in that all were for, no one against. I was actually surprised about it. But you shouldn't think the project is home free, because...
there is a long way still we need the national government to help and others as well but it was a good step forward it pleases me every time we get a new step forward people are pleased and satisfied and I mean we are coming forward but it takes a lot of time. But if we stopped and say oh there's so much trouble that would be a shame. The Bornholm story does not have a happy ending.
After the Okegaboo vote the national government turned down the locus unit as too expensive. The moral of the Bornholm story, and of many of the other stories we have shown, is that an idea may make environmental sense, but it won't get anywhere unless it makes economic sense as well. Today, what makes economic sense is coal, oil, natural gas, fossil fuels. They provide 78% of the world's energy, and the proportion is increasing.
They don't make environmental sense. They create smog in cities, cause acid rain, and contribute heavily to the global warming of the greenhouse effect. Practical ways to reduce fossil fuel use do exist. Highly efficient cars. Much more efficient lights and electric motors.
Renewable solar energy in many forms. But they will never have widespread impact unless they become attractive economically. Right now, fossil fuels are cheap. So the only way alternative fuels can become attractive is if government policies around the world make them so.
That may take an international agreement. But meanwhile, there's a lot that individuals can do to save energy. All those things they did in Osage, Iowa, like better insulation and more efficient lights, they really add up.
You'll help the environment and your pocketbook. Please join me next time for Race to Save the Planet. Major funding for Race to Save the Planet is provided by the Annenberg CPB Project and public television viewers.
Corporate funding is provided by Ocean Spray. Our continuing aim is to preserve and protect what we cannot create. Additional funding is provided by Jesse Smith Noise Foundation, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the John D.
and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and Carnegie Corporation of New York, and by the following. For more information on the College Telecourse, video cassettes, off-air videotaping, and books based on the series, call 1-800-LEARNER. This is PBS. The Global Ecology Handbook, published by Beacon Press, is available for $16.95 plus shipping. A transcript of this program is available for $5.
Please call 1-800-TALK-SHOW or send a check to Race to Save the Planet, Journal Graphics, 267 Broadway, New York, New York, 10007. Next, on Race to Save the Planet, the miracle of modern farming. It feeds the world, but the earth is cracking under the strain. Now, farmers everywhere are discovering alternatives, ways to work with nature. Watch Save the Earth, Feed the World, next time on Race to Save the Planet.