Ho Chi Minh City University of Pedagogy

Department of English

Lecturer: Tạ Tú Quỳnh

Class 4A07

Students:

Hồ Thanh An

Nguyễn Thị Kiều Diễm

Nguyễn Thị Kim Ngân

Võ Trần Mộng Thu

Ho Chi Minh City, October 13, 2010

 2

A DIFFERENT ERA FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

By BARNABY J. FEDER

Published: May 29, 2004

Sales of solar power equipment are hot. Wind energy projects are sprouting up across the

landscape. Methane that builds up in the garbage in landfills is being sold in growing quantities

to generate power.

Alternative energy – solar, wind, geothermal and a grab bag of other sources – is doing

better than ever. But the main reason is not the increase in oil and natural gas prices.

When the cost of fossil fuels rose and fell in past years, the fate of many alternative

energy projects rose and fell with them. But that is no longer true. Indeed, even if prices

eventually recede from their current level of about $40 a barrel to something in the $30 to $35

range, as many expect, analysts predict that most renewable energy projects will not suffer as

badly as they once did.

''We're in a very different era from the late 1970's,'' said Dan Reicher, who served as the top

energy official responsible for alternative and renewable energy sources under President Bill

Clinton. ''The technologies have improved dramatically and come way down in price.''

While alternative energy sources may be growing rapidly, they are starting from such a

small base that their overall role in the energy supply remains small, because alternatives still

remain more expensive than energy produced from fossil fuel.

The Government's Energy Information Agency said recently that production from

renewable energy sources in the United States was 15.5 percent higher in the first two months of

this year than the same period in 2003. But the agency estimates that renewables accounted for

just 6.4 percent of domestic energy consumption last year and that their contribution will climb

to 6.7 percent this year.

 3

This modest increase is reason for optimism, proponents say. Even before oil prices took

off, they note, the outlook for solar energy was brightening, with worldwide annual revenue from

equipment and installation expected to climb from $4.7 billion last year to $30.8 billion in 2013,

according to Clean Edge, a market research firm in San Francisco. Similarly, after a record

expansion last year, permits for new wind energy projects in the United States are piling up as

investors wait anxiously for Washington to renew tax credits that make them more profitable.

Geothermal energy is also getting more interest. In Idaho, Carl F. Austin, a veteran of 40

years in geothermal energy, is feeling good about his chances for raising money for what he

hopes will be that state's first geothermal power project.

''Conditions are the best I've ever seen,'' Mr. Austin said, ''and every prediction is that it's going

to get better.''

Experts debate just how competitive alternative energy sources are versus fossil fuels,

though there is no dispute that over all the price gap has narrowed as oil and natural gas prices

have soared and new technologies have made alternative sources more efficient.

The cost of wind power varies widely with the quality of the windmill site, but prime

locations in the United States generate electricity at well under 5 cents a kilowatt-hour, making

them cheaper than natural-gas-fired plants at current gas prices. But to compete with coal, wind

power generally needs subsidies like the tax credit of 1.8 cents a kilowatt-hour that lapsed at the

end of last year.

Electricity-generating solar panels, which were invented 50 years ago and cost $100 a

watt in 1976 now sell for less than $3 a watt, and are expected to continue declining 5 percent

annually in cost even if there are no technology breakthroughs.

For now, solar energy technology is approximately 10 times as expensive as traditional

fossil fuel systems for generating large amounts of electricity, according to a recent estimate by
 4

the Sandia National Laboratories. But solar is already a cheaper alternative for powering sites

that are long distances from the power grid.

The public reaction to recent price spikes in oil prices could help alternative energy by

putting pressure on politicians to maintain or even increase the vast range of tax credits, grants,

loan guarantees and other subsidies that stimulate investment in alternatives.

Still, while the rise in prices certainly brightens the profit potential for many alternative energy

investments, the increase is too recent -- and too many investors are convinced it will not last --

to account for why the sector is thriving.

Far more important these days is that the new technologies are now seen as essential to

meeting crucial environmental goals.

Traditional fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas are major contributors to air pollution and

the buildup of climate-changing gases in the atmosphere. Their environmental cost is not fully

included in current prices but regulations intended to limit the damage have restricted their

growth prospects.

Thus, although coal prices remain relatively low, Mr. Austin figures his geothermal

project is unlikely to face competition from new coal plants unless somebody comes up with an

unexpected technology breakthrough that minimizes coal's environmental impact without driving

up its cost.

Some technologies, like fuel cells, normally use conventional energy sources but are

viewed as alternatives because they deliver small quantities of clean electricity and heat at

distributed sites instead of in central power plants. But many of the alternatives use renewable

resources like the sun and wind.

Another factor favoring alternative fuels over time is that the most accessible deposits of

fossil fuel are being rapidly depleted. Increased costs to recover remaining supplies are
 5

inevitable, energy experts say. That leaves innovations in how the fuels are converted to energy

as the only barrier to rising prices over the long term.

At the same time, alternative energy sources are being viewed more and more as a

worthwhile insurance policy against the risk of depending on the Middle East and other unstable

regions for the bulk of the world's oil and gas supply.

''Businesses are fundamentally shifting the way they look at energy,'' said R. Neal Elliot, an

industrial energy efficiency expert at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, a

nonprofit policy analysis group based in Washington.

In the 1970's and 1980's, risk management meant investing in boilers that could burn

different fuels and buying futures contracts that guaranteed access to crucial fossil fuels at an

acceptable price, Mr. Elliot said. Now it means stepping up investment in products and processes

that cut energy use and adding alternative sources of energy.

Hence the appeal of projects like the pipeline and gas processing operation near

Spartanburg, S.C., that provides BMW's automobile factory there with power and heat extracted

from waste methane. The methane is drawn from a landfill nearly 10 miles away that is owned

by Waste Management, based in Houston.

The project began operation last year. It was built and is operated by Ameresco, an

energy management company from Framingham, Mass., that is charging BMW a fixed price

over the next 20 years for the electricity and heat.

The BMW factory gets more than a quarter of its electricity and 10 percent of its useful

heat from the methane.

Waste Management, meanwhile, has decided the methane from decomposing garbage in

its many landfills is a major business opportunity. It is looking to build and operate electricity

generating plants or methane supply operations at as many of its landfills as possible, according
 6

to Paul A. Pabor, who became the company's first vice president for renewable energy in

January.

Thirty-one projects have been completed and eight new ones are in development, Mr.

Pabor said.

Today's oil and natural gas prices are largely irrelevant to Waste Management's profit

calculations.

Indeed, the major projects and investments unfolding today are primarily the legacy of

past alarms, including the California electricity shortages of 2001, the start of the war in Iraq in

early 2003 and last summer's blackout in the northeastern United States and Canada.

''Any successes for alternative energy because of today's prices won't be under

the Christmas tree this year,'' said Tim Woodward, managing director at Nth

Power, a venture capital company in San Francisco that invests in a wide range

of energy technology start-ups. ''They could show up in 2005.''

 7

A DIFFERENT ERA FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY

I. Genre

This is a news article which gives comment about the brightening era for alternative

energy in the twenty-first century

II. Content

1. Main idea

This article is used to show that alternative energy is becoming more and more

popular. Together with the development of the Alternative Energy Industry,

producers are reducing the prices dramatically in order to compete with others. As

it is getting cheaper, this era is really one which is for alternative energy.

2. Details

• Paragraph 1. A general introduction about the era of alternative energy

• Paragraph 2. The fate of alternative energy is no longer dependent on the price

of fossil fuels.

• Paragraph 3. Alternative energy consumption is increasing modestly which is

an optimistic signal.

• Paragraph 4. The increase in prices of fossil fuels could make alternative

energy develop rapidly with pressure of public on politicians.

• Paragraph 5. Because alternative energy is environment-friendly and doesn’t

cause pollution, it is favored and encouraged to use world-widely.

• Paragraph 6. Methane and its useful functions

• Paragraph 7. Alternative energy could be under the Christmas tree in the

future.

III.Structure
 8

1. Whole article

• Introduction: Alternative energy is hotter and more popular than ever.

• Body: Alternative energy has many chances to become competitive with fossil

fuels.

• Conclusion: The future of alternative energy is very prosperous.

2. Details

a. Paragraph 1

• Thesis statement: Alternative energy – solar, wind, geothermal and a grab bag

of other sources – is doing better than ever.

• Supporting ideas:

+ Sales of solar power equipment are hot.

+ Wind energy projects are sprouting up across the landscape.

+ Methane that builds up in the garbage in landfills is being sold in growing

quantities to generate power

• Linkers: and, but…

• Method: giving examples and opinions

b. Paragraph 2

• Thesis statement: The technologies have improved dramatically and come

way down in price

• Supporting ideas:

+ When the cost of fossil fuels rose and fell in the past year, the fate of many

alternative energy projects rose and fell with them

+ We’re in very different era from the late 1970’s

• Linkers: when, but, indeed…

 9

• Method: Giving examples and quotations

c. Paragraph 3

• Thesis statement: Conditions are the best I’ve ever seen and every prediction

is that it’s going to get better

• Supporting ideas:

+ The Government’s Energy Information Agency said recently that

production from renewable energy sources in the U.S was 15.5 percent higher

in the first two months of this year than the same period in 2003.

+ Even before oil prices took off, they note, the outlook for solar energy was

brightening with worldwide annual revenue from equipment and installation

expected to climb from $4.7 billion last year to $30.8 billion in 2013

+ In Idaho, Carl F. Austin, a veteran of 40 years in geothermal energy, is

feeling good about his chances for raising money for what he hopes will be

that state’s first geothermal power project

• Linkers: while, because, but, and, even before, similarly…

• Method: comparison

d. Paragraph 4

• Thesis statement: Experts debate just how competitive alternative energy

sources are versus fossil fuels

• Supporting ideas:

+The cost of wind power is cheaper than natural-gas-fired plants at current gas

prices

+ Electricity-generating solar panels now sell less than $3 a watt and continue

declining 5 percent annually in cost if there are no technology breakthroughs

 10

• Linkers: and, according to, but, or…

• Method: giving examples

e. Paragraph 5

Thesis statement: The new technologies are now seen as essential to meeting

crucial environment goals

• Supporting ideas:

+ Traditional fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas lead to air pollution and

that’s the reason why restricted their growth prospects

+ Although coal prices remain relatively low, the geothermal project is

unlikely to face competition from new coal plants

+ Fuel cells are viewed as alternatives because they deliver small quantities of

clean electricity

+ The most accessible deposits of fossil fuel are being rapidly depleted

• Linkers: Thus, although, another…

• Method: giving more information

f. Paragraph 6

• Thesis statement: Stepping up investment in products and processes that cut

energy use and adding alternative sources of energy

• Supporting ideas:

+ The pipeline and gas processing operation provides BMW’s automobile

factory with power and heat extracted from waste methane

+ Waste management has decided the methane from decomposing garbage in

its many landfills is a major business opportunity

 11

+ Thirty-one projects have been completed and eight new ones are in

development

• Linkers: hence, meanwhile…

• Method: giving example of BMW automobile factory

g. Paragraph 7

• Thesis statement: Today’s oil and natural gas prices are largely irrelevant to

Waste Management’s profit calculations

• Supporting ideas:

+ The major projects and investments unfolding today are primarily the legacy

of past alarms

• Linkers: in deed

• Method: using quotations and examples

Part 1 : http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/29/business/a-different-era-for-alternative-
energy.html?scp=110&sq=alternative+energy%2C+renewable+energy&st=nyt

Part 2: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/29/business/a-different-era-for-alternative-
energy.html?scp=110&sq=alternative%20energy,%20renewable
%20energy&st=nyt&pagewanted=2
 12

Big Solar: The Sun’s Rising Power

Editor: Thilo Kunzemann

Publishing date: July 26, 2010

Chinese manufacturing power, falling prices, and technology breakthroughs have

transformed the solar industry from a green niche into a mushrooming market.

“The Sun Always Shines on TV”, a famous Europop song in the 1980s, could be re-released for

the 21st century, just slightly modified: nowadays, the sun always shines on PV.

Photovoltaic solar panels have become a symbol of renewable energy and a greener

future – unfortunately, they still represent less than 0.1 percent of global energy production.

But growth is tremendous. Solar capacity in Germany, the world’s leading PV nation,

will double in 2010 from 10GW to 20 GW, estimates the Swiss bank UBS. And despite

Germany’s moderate climate, these solar panels do already produce massive amounts of

electricity.

Figures from the European Energy Exchange show that solar power accounted for 10

percent of Germany’s electricity consumption during midday peak load on more than ten days in

July 2010 producing some 7GWh of solar power, comparable to the power output of seven

nuclear power plants.

Falling prices have been one reason for this explosive growth. Chinese companies have

entered the solar panel market and gained a market share of more than 50 percent.

Cheap Chinese manufacturing and massive governmental subsidies have more than

halved prices for solar panels since 2008. Shi Zhengrong, CEO of one of China’s biggest solar

panel manufacturers, Suntech Power Holdings, even massive state subsidies in many European

countries like Germany, Italy, or Spain have created a huge market. European companies, once

market leaders, are struggling, but consumers have happily bought into the price slump.
 13

But growing competition and state subsidies aren’t the only driving forces behind the

current solar boom. Technological advances are equally important. While most established

European companies see their market shares melt away, America’s First Solar managed to nearly

double its share in 2009.

The company’s secret: cheaper technology. First Solar’s thin cadmium telluride panels

are less efficient than traditional silicon-based panels, but the Arizona based company has

managed to produce them at significantly lower costs.

In 2009, its panels first broke the 1 dollar per Watt threshold. Recent figures put the cost per watt

installed capacity at 80 Cents, beating most competitors by 30 to 40 percent.

But competitors such as Nanosolar are already working on the next technological leap.

Using nanotechnology, the company has developed a printing process that it says will churn out

ultra-thin and cheap solar panels.

Storing energy

PV pioneers are not just competing with each other, but also with concentrated solar

power (CSP), also called solar thermal power, which reflects sunlight to heat liquids in tubes or

atop towers to create steam.

CSP boasts economies of scale. The largest solar power plants in the world, and the

largest ones planned, are CSP plants. And the more mirrors reflect sunlight, the more steam is

available for the electric turbine.

CSP also allows energy storage. Modern installations like the Abengoa plant in southern

Spain heat molten salt that can store heat for 7.5 hours so the plant can work at night. This ‘base

load’ provides a valuable degree of security that PV parks do not yet offer.

On the other hand, PV can more easily be easily integrated into existing grids and needs

little planning time, even in urban centers.

 14

CSP plants need large amounts of water to cool their steam turbines, just like

conventional power plants. PV panels convert sunlight directly into energy and don’t need

cooling, an advantage in many dry and sunny places.

In hot climates, PV electricity production also mirrors the daily energy use. It produces

energy when air conditioners use most energy to cool buildings. Demand usually drops at night,

when PV panels also go to sleep.

In the long run, both technologies will remain important says solar expert Robert Pitz

from the German Aerospace Center although much will depend on location. CSP plants only

work with direct sunlight and have little value in moderate climates. But for desert countries in

North Africa, CSP plants will be highly attractive.

“The costs for solar power are directly proportional to solar radiation,” says Pitz. “Solar power

from the desert is three times cheaper than solar power produced in Germany. You use the same

machinery but you get three times more power from it.”

It’s only a question of time, says Pitz, until solar power will have significant global

market share. In Europe, the challenge is to combine decentralized and small-scale PV

installations with large CSP plants in Southern Europe and Northern Africa in an intercontinental

power grid.
 15

BIG SOLAR: THE SUN’S RISING POWER

I. Genre

This is a news article in order to inform the readers some essential information about

solar energy generating industry.

II. Content

1. Main idea

This article shows us the prospect of using solar energy as an alternative energy in

the near future with the competitive prices of many investors and manufacturers,

especially those who are from China. In addition, the author wants to introduce

some ways for storing solar energy nowadays.

2. Details

• Paragraph 1. The writer introduces the mushrooming market of solar industry

• Paragraph 2. The reasons for the increase of using solar energy

• Paragraph 3. Some facts about the cheap Chinese manufacturing of solar

panels

• Paragraph 4. Storing solar energy with CSP (concentrated solar power)

• Paragraph 5. Some advantages of using CSP

• Paragraph 6. The author’s opinion about the prospects of solar energy

3. Structure

1. Whole article

• Introduction: Introducing the main idea of the article.

• Body: Giving more information about the increase in using solar energy and

introducing some types of solar panels including their prices and features

• Conclusion: The author’s opinions about the prospect of solar energy

 16

2. Details

a. Paragraph 1

• Thesis statement: Chinese manufacturing power, falling prices, and

technology breakthroughs have transformed the solar industry from a green

niche into a mushrooming market.

• Linkers: no linker

• Method: using fun fact

b. Paragraph 2

• Thesis statement: Nowadays, the sun always shines on PV

• Supporting ideas:

+ Photovoltaic solar panel still represents less than 0.1 percent of global

energy production

+ Solar capacity in Germany will double in 2010 from 10 GW to 20 GW

+ Solar power accounted for 10 percent of Germany’s electricity consumption

• Linkers: but

• Method: Giving facts and figures

c. Paragraph 3

Thesis statement: Falling prices have been one reason for this explosive

growth

• Supporting ideas:

+ Cheap Chinese manufacturing and massive governmental subsidies have

more than halved prices for solar panels since 2008

+ Technological advances are equally important

• Linkers: but, first

 17

• Method: giving opinions

d. Paragraph 4

• Thesis statement: PV pioneers are not just competing with each other but also

with concentrated solar power (CSP)

• Supporting ideas:

+ CSP boats economics of scale

+CSP also allows energy storage

• Linkers: not only… but also, and….

• Method: giving description

e. Paragraph 5

• Thesis statement: PV can more easily be integrated into existing grids and

needs little planning time, even in urban centers

• Supporting ideas:

+ CSP plants need large amounts of water to cool their steam turbines, while

PV panels converted sunlight directly into energy and don’t need cooling

+ In hot climates

+ In long run

• Linkers: on the other hand, even…

• Method: comparison

f. Paragraph 6

• Thesis statement: It’s only a question time until solar power will have

significant global market share

 18

• Supporting ideas:

+ In Europe, the challenge is to combine decentralized and small scale PV

installations with large CSP plants.

• Linkers: no linker

• Method: giving opinions

http://knowledge.allianz.com/en/globalissues/energy_co2/renewable_energy/big_solar_p

ower_growth_energy_renewables_photovoltaic_thermal_csp.html?

utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=solar

%20home_phrase&utm_campaign=Allianz%20Knowledge%20-%20Solar%20Pow
 19

Wind Power
Updated: July 29, 2010

Wind power is one of the fastest-growing sources of energy around the world. It is

popular because it is abundant and provides many communities with a clean, local source of

electricity, as opposed to imported fossil fuels. In the United States, which passed Germany to

become the country producing the most wind power, the Department of Energy has estimated

that wind power could account for 20 percent of the nation's electricity supply by 2030.

Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, the American wind power industry

grew at a blistering pace in 2009, adding 39 percent more capacity. The country is close to the

point where 2 percent of its electricity will come from wind turbines.

The American Wind Energy Association said the growth of wind power was helped by

the federal stimulus package, which extended a tax credit and provided other investment

incentives for the industry.

But the growth could slow. Much of the wind development in 2009 was caused by

momentum from 2008, as huge turbines ordered then were delivered to wind farms. In 2009, the

recession idled many manufacturers and new orders weakened. And despite a decade of efforts,

not a single offshore turbine has been built in the United States. Although in spring 2010, Interior

Secretary Ken Salazar approved the nation's first offshore wind farm, a highly contested project

off the coast of Cape Cod.

Developing wind power has two main problems. First, the wind does not blow all the

time, so there must be backup power plants (often fueled by natural gas) ready to turn on

instantly if the wind slackens.

One state that offers a potential solution is Hawaii, where its officials want 70 percent of

energy needs to be met by renewable sources like the wind, sun or biomass by 2030. At a 30-
 20

megawatt wind farm in Oahu, where the wind supply is gusty and erractic, the plan is to install a

15-megawatt battery to smooth out the flow.

The Hawaii installation is designed to succeed at a crucial but obscure function:

frequency regulation. The battery system can also be used for arbitrage, storing energy at times

when prices are low and delivering it when prices are high.

The second problem with wind is that it sometimes blows the hardest in remote plains, far

from cities that need the energy. In Texas, the leading state for wind power production (followed

by Iowa and California), the wind is strongest on the mesas and high plains of West Texas,

hundreds of miles from big cities like Dallas and Houston. Building transmission lines is

expensive and difficult.

The idea of building wind farms offshore, in the sea, is gaining momentum. Putting

turbines in the water is expensive, but the advantage is that the wind blows much harder off the

coasts, and unlike wind over the continent, which often blows hardest at night, offshore breezes

can be strong in the afternoon, matching the time when people are using the most electricity.

Offshore turbines can also be located close to the power-hungry populations along the coasts,

eliminating the need for new overland transmission lines. And if the turbines are built far enough

from shore, they do not significantly alter the view — a major objection from many local

opponents.

Europe has already ventured into offshore wind territory — there are wind turbines off

the coasts of Denmark, Britain and seven other European countries. China's first offshore wind

farm is a 102-megawatt venture near Shanghai, with more in the pipeline. In the United States, at

least half a dozen offshore wind projects have been proposed in the shallow waters off the East

Coast and the Great Lakes. But the projects face many hurdles. The proposal to build Cape Wind

farm off Cape Cod stalled for nine years before the federal government approved it. The project
 21

pitted coastal Indian tribes, business interest and homeowners against the developer and

proponents of alternative energy.

Cape Wind Project

The Obama administration approved the Cape Wind project on April 28, 2010. Interior

Secretary Ken Salazar announced the decision and said it would be the first of many such

projects.

The approval of the wind farm gives a significant boost to the nascent offshore wind

industry in the United States. The Cape Wind project would place 130 turbines, each 440 feet

tall, over 24 square miles of Nantucket Sound at a likely cost of more than $1 billion.

Several regulatory hurdles remain, and Cape Wind has yet to sign a contract with the

local utility, National Grid, to carry the wind power.

Opponents of the wind farm have vowed to go to court, potentially stalling Cape Wind

for several more years. They have argued that the venture is too expensive and would interfere

with local fishermen, intrude on the sacred rituals and submerged burial grounds of two local

Indian tribes and destroy the view.

Proponents of the project, which include major environmental organizations like the

Sierra Club and Greenpeace, point to a February study by Charles River Associates, a consulting

firm hired by Cape Wind's developers, suggesting that the project could save New England

ratepayers $4.6 billion in energy costs over 25 years. They also say that the project has

undergone two separate environmental impact analyses, neither of which found significant

downsides.

The governors of six East Coast states — Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New

Jersey, New York and Rhode Island — had called on Mr. Salazar to approve the project.
 22

Wind Power
I. Genre

This article is a fact – filled article. In this article, author has given enough factual

material and statistics about the advantages and problems can be met when the government

carries out many projects of wind power in the United States. This makes the articles more

convincing and informative.

II. Content:

The main idea of the article is about the growth of wind energy and some hurdles as well

as momentum when developing this.

In one hand, the author of this article defines some difficulties they can meet when

proceeding wind – power projects such as the frequency of the wind and the cost of building

transmission lines when they want to build wind farms in remote plains and offshore.

On the other hand, he also supplies several benefits that they can have since they build

wind farms offshore.

In paragraph 1, the author introduces the background of using wind power throughout the

world and in the United States.

In paragraph 2 and 3, the author gives some evidences of the growth of wind power in

U.S despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets. He also bring out the reason of the

growth of wind power.

In paragraph 4, he gives the statements on wind power’s slow growth. This caused by the

recession happened in 2009. Many manufacturers and new orders are idled, not a single offshore

turbine has been built in the United States.

In paragraph 5, 6, 7 and 8, we can see that the author draws out some main problems of

proceeding wind power project. The first problem mentioned in paragraph 5, 6 and 7 is the
 23

frequency of the wind. Because the wind does not blow all the time, they have to build backup

power plants (fueled by natural gas or using battery). Paragraph 8 mentions the second problem

which is the cost. As we can see that wind blows the hardest in remote plains which are very far

away from the cities. In order to supply electricity to the residential areas, they have to build a

large grid of transmission lines which costs a lot of money.

In paragraph 9 and 10, there’re some ideas supporting the projects of building offshore

wind plants in United States and other countries like China, Denmark, Britain…etc. because of

below reasons. As the wind off the coast blows much harder, the wind plants can supply enough

power to power-hungry populations along the coasts. Moreover, they won’t significantly alter the

view if the turbines are built far enough from shore.

The rest paragraphs: 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 mentions about the Cape Wind Project

which is approved on April 28, 2010. Although there’re some opponents of the wind farm

because of the expensive cost and its ability of interfering with local fishermen, this project has

been approved thanks to the governors of six East Coast states – Delaware, Maryland,

Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island.

III.Structure

1) Whole article:

- Title: Wind power

- Introduction: “Wind power is one of the fastest-growing sources... incentives for the

industry”

- Lead paragraph (the Why lead): “But the growth could slow… project off the coast of

Cape Cod”

- Body: “Developing wind power has two main problems… which found significant

downsides”

- Conclusion: “The governors… to approve the project”

 24

2) Details:

a. Paragraph 1:

• Thesis statement: Wind power is one of the fastest-growing sources of energy

around the world.

• Supporting ideas:

+ Reasons why it’s so popular: abundant, clean and local source of

electricity.

+ In the United States, wind power account for 20 percent of the nation’s

electricity supply by 2030

• Linkers: because

b. Paragraph 2:

• Thesis statement: Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, the

American wind power industry grew at a blistering pace in 2009

• Supporting ideas:

+ Adding 39 percent more capacity

+ Close to the point where 2 percent of its electricity will come from win

turbine

• Linkers: despite

c. Paragraph 3:

• Thesis statement: The growth of wind power was helped by the federal

stimulus package

• Supporting ideas:

+ Extended a tax credit

+ Provided other investment incentives for the industry

 25

d. Paragraph 4:

• Thesis statement: But the growth could slow.

• Supporting ideas:

+ In 2009, the recession idled many manufacturers and new orders

weakened.

+ Not a single offshore turbine has been built

• Linkers: but, although, as, and

e. Paragraph 5, 6, 7 and 8:

• Thesis statements: Developing wind power has two main problems

• Supporting ideas:

+ The wind does not blow all the time  there must be backup power

plants but they sometimes have obscure function: frequency function

+ Building transmission lines is expensive and difficult when building

wind farms in remote plains

• Linkers: First, second, so, or, but, and

f. Paragraph 9 and 10:

• Thesis statements: The idea of building wind farms offshore, in the sea, is

gaining momentum

• Supporting ideas:

+ The advantage of putting turbines in the water is that the wind blows

much harder off the coasts

+ Offshore breezes can be strong in the afternoon  the time people are

using the most electricity

 26

+ They can also be located close to the power-hungry populations along

the coasts

+ They do not significantly alter the view if they are built far enough from

shore

+ Europe has ventured into offshore wind territory

+ China’s first offshore wind farm is a 102-megawatt venture near

Shanghai

+ In the United States, at least half dozen offshore wind projects have been

proposed

• Linkers: but, and, also

g. Paragraph 11

• Thesis statements: The Obama administration approved the Cape Wind

project on April 28, 2010.

• Supporting ideas

+ It would be the first of many such projects

• Linker: and

h. Paragraph 12

• Thesis statements: The approval of the wind farm gives a significant boost to

the nascent offshore wind industry in the United States

• Supporting ideas:

+ It would place 130 turbines

• Linkers:
 27

i. Paragraph 13 and 14:

• Thesis statements: Several regulatory hurdles remain, and Cape Wind has yet

to sign a contract with the local utility, National Grid, to carry the wind power

• Supporting ideas:

+ They potentially stall Cape Wind for several years because of

opponents of the wind farm

+ Some argue that the venture is too expensive and would interfere

with local fishermen

j. Paragraph 15:

• Thesis statement: Proponents of the project, which include major

environmental organization like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace, point to

February study by Charles River Associates, a consulting firm hired by Cape

Wind’s developers, suggesting that the project could save New England

ratepayers $4.6 billion in energy costs over 25 years.

• Supporting ideas:

+ The project has undergone two separate environmental impact

analyses, neither of which found significant downsides.

• Linkers: also

k. Paragraph 16:

• Thesis statements: The governors of six East Coast states – Delaware,

Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Rhode Island – had

called on Mr. Salazar to approve the projects.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/energy-environment/wind-power/index.html?
scp=11&sq=alternative%20energy,%20renewable%20energy&st=cse
 28

What’s So Bad About Big?

Chris Richards for The New York Times

A solar-power installation in the Arizona desert uses 100,000 square feet of mirrors.

By MATTHEW L. WALD

Published: March 7, 2007

“SMALL is beautiful,” wrote the economist E. F. Schumacher almost 35 years ago. In most

areas of the economy, he reasoned, production had become too big and too centralized.

Big Is Beautiful

But he might have been wrong about the subject he knew most about: energy. When it

comes to alternative ways of generating power, big may be better.

Wind, solar and other renewable-energy technologies that were once considered more

appropriate for single homes or small communities are reaching levels of scale and centralizing

that were formerly the province of coal- and gas-fired plants and nuclear reactors. In other

words, green is going giant.

The companies that are building or dreaming up large projects argue that there are

economies of scale to be gained.

In the desert north of Tucson, Arizona Public Service, an electric utility, is using an array of

mirrors to concentrate sunlight and heat mineral oil up to 550 degrees; the heat vaporizes a liquid

hydrocarbon, which runs a generator to make electricity.

But this is no rooftop operation. There are six rows of mirrors, each nearly a quarter-mile

long, totaling nearly 100,000 square feet. The project produces one megawatt of power —

enough to run a hospital or a large shopping center — but the company that installed it, now

called Acciona Solar Power (formerly Solargenix), expects to open a 350-acre plant in Boulder

City, Nev., soon, producing 64 megawatts with similar technology. And Arizona Public Service
 29

is one of about a half-dozen utilities that is considering a joint project to build a 250-megawatt

plant based on the same technology.

Such projects run counter to some ideas of how alternative energy should be developed.

Jeremy Rifkin, the author and futurist who believes that millions of people will soon be

generating their own hydrogen from renewable energy, said that waste was built into large

central projects because of electrical transmission losses.

“If you go and put it in the desert and bring it back in, you lose 7 to 9 percent on the way,” he

said.

More to the point, Mr. Rifkin said, home-grown energy is going to be cheaper. “It’s a

question of who owns and controls it at the end of the line,” he said. “If you own it on your own,

it’s going to be at a cheaper price than if the utility company is going to sell it to you.”

But it is not just corporations that are finding that bigger may be better.

Hull, Mass., is about as far from an oil or gas well as it is possible to get in the United

States. Its municipal utility decided in the early 1980s to build a wind turbine, making an asset

from the strong breeze coming off the ocean north of Boston. The machine it built could generate

40 kilowatts, enough for a handful of homes.

Five years ago, Hull tried again, still wanting to cut energy costs and also the emissions

of greenhouse gases that might one day cause the Atlantic Ocean, which surrounds the town on

three sides, to creep up the beaches. It built a wind machine 16 times larger, 660 kilowatts. While

the 1985 turbine was on a structure that looked a bit like a ham-radio operator’s antenna, the new

one, named Hull 1, was on a 150-foot tower.

But it was too small. Last year the town installed Hull 2, which at 1.8 megawatts is three

times larger. Now Hull is considering four new turbines that can produce 3.6 megawatts each.

“The small one we have, purely aesthetically, is kind of an ugly thing,” said John B. Murdock,
 30

manager of the municipal electric system. With their slow-moving, graceful blades, he said, “the

big ones are much more attractive.”

They also make better economic sense, he said. Earlier this year, the town put up a tiny

turbine, 1,800 watts, as an educational tool, for $15,000. If 1,000 families in the area put up such

machines, they would have the same output as Hull 2, at a cost of $15 million. Hull 2 cost about

$3 million.

Hull’s economics are being repeated around New England and the world. Farther down

the Massachusetts coast in Nantucket Sound, for example, entrepreneurs are trying to build the

Cape Wind project, 130 turbines producing 3.6 megawatts each.

At Siemens Power Generation, which builds equipment for wind turbines and other generators,

Randy Zwirn, the chief executive, said that the only limit to wind-turbine size might be how long

a blade could be transported to the site. The company’s 3.6-megawatt machine uses a blade that

is about 175 feet long.

Other companies want to build even bigger wind turbines with capacities as high as seven

megawatts. A larger machine would be even higher — perhaps 250 feet — and could take

advantage of the fact that winds are 20 percent stronger at 250 feet than at 150 feet, said Dr.

Mark Z. Jacobson, an associate professor at Stanford’s department of civil and environmental

engineering.

But in Nantucket Sound, 3.6-megawatt turbines are considered big enough. On a windy

day, the 130 machines would produce as much power as a modest-size plant burning coal or

natural gas.

There is certainly no point in making the project smaller, said Mark Rodgers, a

spokesman for Cape Wind.

“You’ve got costs that include staging, marine construction, placing an electric

transmission infrastructure below the seabed, acquisition of maintenance vessels, use of a

 31

port facility, spare parts, storage, manning an operations center, insurance and taxes,” he

said.

For many of those items, if the project were 50 percent larger or 50 percent smaller, the

costs would vary little. “These are things that you’re going to have to do, whether it’s a very

small or a very large offshore wind farm,” Mr. Rodgers said. “The best bang for the buck is go to

large.”

While mirrors in the desert cannot operate at the rooftop scale, the kind that can,

photovoltaic cells, which turn sunlight into energy, may also work better on a big scale, experts

say.

A single-home installation is fine, they say, but not cost-effective. It can become so

through large-scale deployment of the kind envisioned by Bud Annan, who was the solar

program director at the Department of Energy during the Clinton administration.

Mr. Annan said that the cost of a rooftop solar project was divided between the

manufacturing of solar cells and installation. Some progress has been made in reducing

manufacturing costs, but both parts of the equation must come down in price, he said.

Now living in Scottsdale, Ariz., Mr. Annan is working with a utility and local real estate

developers to try to incorporate solar roofs into 10,000 new houses, all at once. That way, he

said, the installers can go from house to house the way carpenters, plumbers and electricians do.

“He can standardize his installation, and that whole second half of the equation becomes more

manageable for him,” Mr. Annan said.

Clusters of houses might share a bank of batteries, so that they could guarantee a steady

power output. Power that a utility can count on is worth more than power that is unpredictable.

Solar energy that is connected to a battery system is available even after the sun sets, making it

sell for a higher price.

 32

Roger Little, chief executive of the Spire Corporation, a solar cell manufacturer near

Boston, said his systems cost $7 or $8 per watt of installed capacity when put on rooftops, which

means that the equipment needed to light a 100-watt bulb would cost $700 to $800. Half is for

the cells and half is for the rest of the system, including mounting brackets and external wiring.

Mr. Little said he could lower the price to $3.60, but that the first step would have to be

replacing typical solar panels, which produce about 160 watts of electricity each, with a 1,000-

watt panel. The big panel would require less support material per watt than the smaller ones, he

said.

But that panel would be 200 pounds, too heavy to haul up to a roof. The solution, he said,

is to install it on the ground, in a big flat spot of desert — which, by the way, would be a

wonderful place to build the solar-cell factory, cutting delivery costs to zero. And the bigger the

installation, the lower the cost, per watt, of the other equipment required, he said.

Mr. Little is negotiating with the Tucson Electric Company to build a factory in Arizona

that would produce 100 megawatts of cells a year, and run it for 10 years or so. Other cities and

companies are considering similar ideas. Mr. Little said that at some point his project would turn

into a “breeder,” its electric production paying for its operation.

His company already runs factories that make 50 megawatts of new cells a year. The

viability of the project depends mostly on whether Congress extends the production tax credit

given to renewable and nuclear energy, he said.

Arizona Public Service, which operates the solar generator north of Tucson, seems to be

on a campaign to show that there is no green approach that does not work well on a corporate

scale. Last year, it started raising algae, feeding them carbon dioxide from a natural-gas-fired

power plant, Red Hawk, west of Phoenix. It used the algae to make biodiesel, a vehicle fuel that

is more commonly made from soybeans or corn. The company is now installing bigger

equipment to test the process on a larger scale.

 33

Even for renewable energy like heating with wood (an idea that has been around for

much longer than the term “renewable”), the scale is growing. For example, the University of

South Carolina would like to reduce its carbon footprint and lower its natural-gas bill of $6.5

million a year. So this spring it plans to open a plant that will use wood scraps to make

electricity, and use steam from the system’s waste heat to warm the campus.

This is not some wood-fired boiler. It is an $18 million gasification project that will heat

the wood, mostly chips and bark, to produce a flammable gas, which will be burned in a turbine

that resembles a jet engine. And the university will not run it on clippings from trees at the

Columbia campus; it will take 14 tractor-trailer loads a day, about 55,000 tons a year.

Because the wood is gasified but not burned, the system, which is similar to one used in

Burlington, Vt., produces less nitrogen oxides and less soot than a boiler would, said Jonathan S.

Rhone, chief of the Nexterra Energy Corporation of Vancouver, British Columbia, which built

the gasifier. But being that clean requires an industrial-size system.

There is another reason that it is not the kind of project that works on a small basis: it will

take about 14 years to pay for itself. “We’ve been here 200 years,” said Helen Zeigler, the

university business manager. “We can afford to make investments like this.” A 14-year payback

would never work on a family budget, she said.

 34

What’s So Bad About Big?

I. Genre

This is a news article which provides readers some valuable information, facts and figure

about alternative energy devices.

II. Content

1) Main idea

This article points out some merits of alternative energy due to its big size. This is

contrary to the opinion of the economist E.F. Schumacher almost about 35 years ago. Through

the article, we can understand more about some ways of installing the energy devices such as the

wind turbines and the solar panels. Besides, we can see that the cost of alternative energy can be

declined thank to the big size of the machines producing electricity.

2) Details

• Paragraph 1. The writer contrasts the two different opinions.

• Paragraph 2. Some evidences to prove that ‘big is beautiful’.

• Paragraph 3. Hull’s intention to install large wind turbines which costs much

less than small ones.

• Paragraph 4. Some manufacturers prove that if many families put up such

machines, they can reduce the cost of the installation.

• Paragraph 5. More extra information about this new project.

• Paragraph 6. A few evaluations of experts in energy.

• Paragraph 7. Good prospect about the future of alternative energy.

III.Structure

1) Whole article

• Introduction: Introducing the main idea of the article.

 35

• Body: Explaining how wind turbines and solar panels are installed. Give

examples and quotations of some experts to make the point of the article clear.

• Conclusion: Optimistic outlook about the future of alternative energy.

2) Details

a. Paragraph 1

• Thesis statement: ‘Big is beautiful.’

• Supporting ideas:

+ When it comes to alternative ways of generating power, big maybe better

+ In other words, green is going giant

• Linkers: But, when, in other words

• Method: contrasting and using quotations

b. Paragraph 2

• Thesis statement: But it is not just corporations that are finding that bigger

maybe better

• Supporting ideas:

+ The companies that are building or dreaming up large projects argue that

there are economies of scale to be gained.

+ There are six rows of mirrors, each nearly a quarter mile long, totaling

nearly 100,000 square feet.

+ And Arizona Public Service is one of about a half-dozen utilities that is

considering a joint project to build a 250 megawatt plant based on the same

technology.

• Linkers: But, and, more to the point…

• Method: Giving examples and opinions

 36

c. Paragraph 3

• Thesis statement: Hull, Mass, is about as far from an oil or gas well as it is

possible to get in the United States.

• Supporting ideas:

+ The machine it built could generate 40 kilowatts, enough for a handful of

homes

+ It built a wind machine 16 times larger, 660 kilowatts

+ Now Hull is considering four new turbines that can produce 36 megawatts

each

+ Hull’s economics are being repeated around New England and the world

• Linkers: also, while, but…

• Method: description and giving detail information

d. Paragraph 4

• Thesis statement: At Siemens Power Generation, which builds equipment for

wind turbines other generators, Randy Zwirn, the chief executive, said that the

only limit to wind-turbine size might be how long a blade could be transported

to the site.

• Supporting ideas:

+ A large machine would be even higher – perhaps 250 feet

+ On the windy day, the 130 machines would produce as much power as a

modest-size plant burning coal or natural gas

+ A single-home installation is fine, they say, but not cost effective

• Linkers: and, but, while…

 37

• Method: giving examples and opinions

e. Paragraph 5

• Thesis statement: The company is now installing bigger equipment to test a

process on a large scale

• Supporting ideas:

+ Now living in Scottsdale, Ariz, Mr. Annan is working with a utility and

local real estate developers to try to incorporate solar roofs into 10,000 new

houses, all at one.

+ Roger Little, chief executive of the Spire Corporation, a solar cell

manufacturer near Boston, said his systems cost $7 or $8 per watt of installed

capacity when put on roof tops, which means that the equipment needed to

light a 100-watt bulb would cost $700 or $800.

+ And the bigger the installation, the lower the cost per watt, of the other

equipment required, he said.

• Linkers: that way, so that, but, and…

• Method: giving real facts and figures

f. Paragraph 6

• Thesis statement: Even for renewable energy like heating with wood, the scale

is growing

• Supporting ideas:

+ Because the wood is gasified but not burned, the system, which is similar to

one used in Burlington, Vt., produces less nitrogen oxides and less soot than a

boiler would.

+ It is an $18 million gasification project that will heat the world

 38

+ The University of Carolina would like to reduce its carbon footprint and

lower its natural gas bill of $6.5 million a year.

• Linkers: because, but…

• Method: continue giving facts and figures to support the writer’s idea

g. Paragraph 7

• Thesis statement: There is another reason that it is not the kind of project that

works on a small basis: it will take about 14 years to pay for itself.

• Supporting ideas:

+ A 14-year payback would never work on a family budget.

• Linkers: no linker

• Method: using quotations

Part 1: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/business/businessspecial2/07big.html?
_r=1&pagewanted=1&sq=alternative%20energy,%20renewable%20energy&st=nyt&scp=81

Part 2: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/business/businessspecial2/07big.html?
_r=1&pagewanted=2&sq=alternative%20energ,%20renewable%20energy&st=nyt&scp=81

Part 3: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/07/business/businessspecial2/07big.html?
_r=1&pagewanted=3&sq=alternative%20energy,%20renewable%20energy&st=nyt&scp=81