20 PowerPoint Slides That Shook the Earth

These slides have served as change agents in greentech circles. By popular demand, we’ve added a few slides to the collection.

BY ERIC WESOFF (SEPTEMBER 22, 2011)—If you attend enough cleantech events or are pitched by enough startups, you start to see the same few PowerPoint slides over and over again. Here is a collection of the best or at least the most notorious and historically significant slides in our industry. This collection has been one of our most popular pieces and I'm taking the opportunity to updat some of the charts and add some additional commentary.

After publishing this list to an overwhelming response, we heard from the original architects of some of these iconic greentech slides and we made sure to give them their overdue credit.

From the BP Statistical Review of World Energy -- here's a painful reminder of what we pay at the pump. It's a chart of Crude Oil Prices From 1861 to 2010.

Make sure to contrast that with the Price Trends in Solar Modules in this slide with data from IPCC and Paula Mints of Navigant.  We've gone from $60 per watt to $1.50 per watt. What will it be in 2020?



Lawrence Livemore's classic Energy Flowchart:  A good slide provides a wealth of information in an intuitive, understandable way -- and this slide certainly does that.  This one slide shows energy inputs and outputs and really drives home the tiny foothold that renewables have in the American energy mix.

By the way, Americans are using less total energy and more renewable energy, according to LLNL.  The U.S. used less coal, petroleum, and natural gas in 2009 than in 2008, and increased its use of wind, solar, hydro and geothermal, according to the LLNL energy flow charts.  This probably has as much to do with reduced economic activity as it does a shift in energy sources.



EPRI's Prism Chart.  EPRI, the Electric Power Research Institute, is almost entirely funded by incumbent power companies, so their information has to be viewed through that lens.  Nevertheless, the "Prism" slide has found its way into many greentech presentations, mine included.  It conveys the challenge involved in reducing CO2 emissions from the electric sector down to 1990 levels.  According to EPRI, this task will require significant amounts of CCS (Carbon Capture and Sequestration), as well as another 64 gigawatts of nuclear power by 2030.



Carbon Wedges.  Princeton's Carbon Mitigation Initiative and the NRDC can both play the EPRI CO2 reduction game, as well.  The NRDC, though, does it without the nuclear wedge.




The Keeling Curve.  Regardless of the flaws of An Inconvenient Truth, the movie, or those of Al Gore, the man, the movie and the man present this CO2 data in a variety of compelling ways.  The graph shows the variation in concentration of  CO2 in the atmosphere over the last fifty years based on Charles Keeling's measurements at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii. Even if you don't subscribe to the theory of anthropogenic global warming, this chart is pretty stark evidence that something is happening and it's happening fast.

This slide from the CEC illustrates the "Rosenfeld Effect." California's per-capita electricity consumption stayed flat while consumption in the rest of the U.S. went up.  Why? Largely because of the California Energy Commission leadership of Art Rosenfeld.  During his tenure, California instituted utility efficiency programs, appliance standards and building standards that saved the state billions of dollars, millions of kilowatt-hours, and avoided the building of a large number of power plants.  It's not all about high technology.

The wind power flying spaghetti monster. If you've ever attended an event pertaining to energy storage, it's not unheard of for every presenter to flash this one.  It's originally from a 2007 CAISO (California Independent System Operator) report on Integration of Renewable Resources and shows the scary variable nature of wind power.  It speaks volumes on the intermittent nature of wind and the challenges of integrating renewable energy onto the grid without energy storage or fossil-fuel backup.
This type of variability and ramp up / ramp down strikes fear in the heart of every ISO (Independent System Operator). Read what Jim Detmers, formerly of CAISO had to say here.

The solar variability slide is just as scary in terms of the ramp-up and ramp-down rate, with cloud cover causing voltage sags.  This slide makes the rounds and comes originally from Jay Apt and Aimee Curtright's Working Paper, "The Spectrum of Power from Utility-Scale Wind Farms and Solar Photovoltaic Arrays."

BY ERIC WESOFF (SEPTEMBER 22, 2011)
The McKinsey Efficiency Study "finds that the U.S. could reduce annual GHG emissions by as much as 3.0 gigatons in the mid-range case to 4.5 gigatons in the high range case by 2030. These reductions from reference case projections would bring U.S. emissions down 7 to 28 percent below 2005 levels, and could be made at a marginal cost less than $50 per ton, while maintaining comparable levels of consumer utility."

The thrust of the McKinsey study is that there are pollution reduction choices that can be achieved at “negative cost.”  This flies in the face of economic theory, which would have us believe that companies and consumers would not willingly pass up profits by making changes in lighting, fuel efficiency, industrial process improvements, etc.  Turns out consumers aren't always entirely rational.

NREL's solar cell efficiencies slide.  The slide that launched several hundred solar startups is also partially responsible for the great concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) scare of 2008.  It does show the lag between hero experiment efficiencies and real-world PV performance and must be included in every solar presentation -- by law.

  

There are a lot of complicated ways to graphically illustrate the consumer side of the smart grid. This concise slide is not one of them.  EPRI claims authorship of this one.

The cubic mile of oil. The world uses about 30 billion barrels of oil per year. That is 1.2 trillion gallons, which works out to just about 1 cubic mile of oil.

And another way of illustrating the same concept:

Image courtesy of IEEE Spectrum

This slide from the leading renewable energy utility PG&E of Northern California (by way of Nissan) shows that fast charging a plug-in electric vehicle places a load on the grid equivalent to the average peak summer load of a single home.  Except that these loads move around from place to place and charge up whenever they feel like it, in the middle of the day or the middle of the night.  It means that widespread EV usage can't happen without a smart grid vehicle infrastructure.

Germany has the same solar insolation as the U.S. state of Alaska. Yet Germany is the global leader in solar installations. Why is that?  Three words: policy, policy, policy.  Mr. Colin Murchie Director, Federal Government Affairs at SolarCity and performer at Washington Improv Theater, originally produced this slide for SEIA.

Khosla Ventures' green portfolio.  This slide was immensely improved when the VC firm got a new graphic designer and got rid of the light bulb design.  In any case, it shows what you can do if you have a grand vision, sizable cojones and several billion dollars of your own and other people's money. And time for board meetings -- lots of board meetings.  The slide lists 40+ green startups, intelligently parsed, and we would bet there are a few more not being shown. One of these might be the black swan.  Vinod only has to be right one time out of ten or twenty to reinforce his genius status.



Bonus shameless self-promotion slide: Downloaded tens of thousands of times, this slide from Greentech Media's smart grid analysts smartly lays out the layers and players in the smart grid ecosystem:

And a final word on PowerPoint from Mr. Tufte:

Michael Kanellos contributed to this article.  Actually, he thought up the title and then went on vacation.

Success in the industry

D.light Design’s CEO on Innovation, Energy, and Emerging Markets

“Cleantech is necessary but insufficient for success.”

ERIC WESOFF (April 10, 2012)–As a reporter based in California's Silicon Valley, I am guilty of a certain degree of American and California-centric myopia. There is the occasional tendency to accept that one-percenters driving Fisker Karmas and Tesla Roadsters are actually the vanguard of a renewable energy economy. Or that residential energy dashboards or pretty thermostats are the key to a coal-free future.

Upon reflection, none of these technology-rich products pass the Chindia test. The "Chindia test" is a term coined by VC investor Vinod Khosla that suggests energy solutions must work in China and India if they are to have any material impact.

So how does an entrepreneur make a difference in emerging markets like China or India or in certain cases, the U.S.?

The Berkeley-Stanford Cleantech Conference on April 12 at the Stanford campus explores that question from a number of angles. Mr. Khosla will be offering his view in one of the keynotes.
Donn Tice, the CEO and Chairman of D.light Design, a cleantech entrepreurial success in the developing world, is also speaking at that event.

D.light builds a line of affordable, solar-powered lamps -- including one with a mobile-phone charging feature -- with the aim of replacing kerosene-powered lights, which are dirty and dangerous. The company's target is to improve the quality of life for 50 million people by 2015. The firm has funding from philanthropic investors like the Omidyar Network as well as traditional VCs like DFJ and Garage Technology Ventures. Building the solar lamp is one part of the enterprise; the other is creating a sales network to get the device into the hands of the people who need it.

According to Tice, the threshold question is "How important is technology?" and "What is impactful technology?"

As cleantech companies in developed economies navigate an uncertain policy and economic environment in their own countries, a huge opportunity is opening up for these firms to sell their products and develop projects in emerging markets.

Tice spoke of the previously mentioned technologist prejudice. "We have a bias that large-scale, capital-intensive, technology solutions are what works. In the developed world they do. In the non-developed world, they don't." He adds that "Cleantech is necessary but insufficient for success. It's great and important -- once you have technology, you're in the game."

So getting technology into people's hands in emerging economies comes down to distribution and education. "Technology is enabling, but you actually have to get the product to these places. You have to educate, demonstrate and then maybe the people will adopt." He added, "If you think that last mile of cable [in the U.S.] is difficult, what do you do in Uthar Pradesh, India?"

Tice concluded, "It's not build it and they will come." It's "What is the appropriate technology for these consumers and these markets?"

Obama calls on Congress to end oil subsidies

Speaking from the White House Rose Garden, President Obama called on Congress to cut subsidies to the oil industry:

Right now, the biggest oil companies are raking in record profits –- profits that go up every time folks pull up into a gas station. But on top of these record profits, oil companies are also getting billions a year - billions a year in taxpayer subsidies -– a subsidy that they’ve enjoyed year after year for the last century

The Senate is expected to vote on a measure that cuts certain subsidies later Thursday. While it's future remains uncertain, the president has increasingly discussed the issue of energy as gas prices rise at the pump:

It’s not as if these companies can’t stand on their own. Last year, the three biggest U.S. oil companies took home more than $80 billion in profits. Exxon pocketed nearly $4.7 million every hour. And when the price of oil goes up, prices at the pump go up, and so do these companies’ profits. In fact, one analysis shows that every time gas goes up by a penny, these companies usually pocket another $200 million in quarterly profits. Meanwhile, these companies pay a lower tax rate than most other companies on their investments, partly because we’re giving them billions in tax giveaways every year.

Obama's full remarks after the jump:

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. Everybody, please have a seat. Sorry we’re running just a little bit behind, but I figured it’s a great day to enjoy the Rose Garden.

Today, members of Congress have a simple choice to make: They can stand with the big oil companies, or they can stand with the American people.

Right now, the biggest oil companies are raking in record profits –- profits that go up every time folks pull up into a gas station. But on top of these record profits, oil companies are also getting billions a year - billions a year in taxpayer subsidies -– a subsidy that they’ve enjoyed year after year for the last century.

Think about that. It’s like hitting the American people twice. You’re already paying a premium at the pump right now. And on top of that, Congress, up until this point, has thought it was a good idea to send billions of dollars more in tax dollars to the oil industry.

It’s not as if these companies can’t stand on their own. Last year, the three biggest U.S. oil companies took home more than $80 billion in profits. Exxon pocketed nearly $4.7 million every hour. And when the price of oil goes up, prices at the pump go up, and so do these companies’ profits. In fact, one analysis shows that every time gas goes up by a penny, these companies usually pocket another $200 million in quarterly profits.

Meanwhile, these companies pay a lower tax rate than most other companies on their investments, partly because we’re giving them billions in tax giveaways every year.
Now, I want to make clear, we all know that drilling for oil has to be a key part of our overall energy strategy. We want U.S. oil companies to be doing well. We want them to succeed. That’s why under my administration, we’ve opened up millions of acres of federal lands and waters to oil and gas production. We’ve quadrupled the number of operating oil rigs to a record high. We’ve added enough oil and gas pipeline to circle the Earth and then some. And just yesterday, we announced the next step for potential new oil and gas exploration in the Atlantic.

So the fact is, we’re producing more oil right now than we have in eight years, and we’re importing less of it as well. For two years in a row, America has bought less oil from other countries than we produce here at home -– for the first time in over a decade.

So American oil is booming. The oil industry is doing just fine. With record profits and rising production, I’m not worried about the big oil companies. With high oil prices around the world, they’ve got more than enough incentive to produce even more oil. That’s why I think it’s time they got by without more help from taxpayers who are already having a tough enough time paying the bills and filling up their gas tank. And I think it’s curious that some folks in Congress, who are the first to belittle investments in new sources of energy, are the ones that are fighting the hardest to maintain these giveaways for the oil companies.

Instead of taxpayer giveaways to an industry that’s never been more profitable, we should be using that money to double-down on investments in clean energy technologies that have never been more promising - investments in wind power and solar power and biofuels; investments in fuel-efficient cars and trucks, and energy-efficient homes and buildings. That’s the future. That’s the only way we're going to break this cycle of high gas prices that happen year after year after year. As the economy is growing, the only time you start seeing lower gas prices is when the economy is doing badly. That’s not the kind of pattern that we want to be in. We want the economy doing well, and people to be able to afford their energy costs.

And keep in mind, we can’t just drill our way out of this problem. As I said, oil production here in the United States is doing very well, and it's been doing well even as gas prices are going up. Well, the reason is because we use more than 20 percent of the world’s oil but we only have 2 percent of the world’s known oil reserves. And that means we could drill every drop of American oil tomorrow but we’d still have to buy oil from other countries to make up the difference. We’d still have to depend on other countries to meet our energy needs. And because it’s a world market, the fact that we’re doing more here in the United States doesn’t necessarily help us because even U.S. oil companies they’re selling that oil on a worldwide market. They’re not keeping it just for us. And that means that if there’s rising demand around the world then the prices are going to up.

That’s not the future that I want for America. I don’t want folks like these back here and the folks in front of me to have to pay more at the pump every time that there’s some unrest in the Middle East and oil speculators get nervous about whether there’s going to be enough supply. I don’t want our kids to be held hostage to events on the other side of the world.

I want us to control our own destiny. I want us to forge our own future. And that’s why, as long as I’m President, America is going to pursue an all-of-the-above energy strategy, which means we will continue developing our oil and gas resources in a robust and responsible way. But it also means that we’re going to keep developing more advanced homegrown biofuels, the kinds that are already powering truck fleets across America.

We’re going to keep investing in clean energy like the wind power and solar power that’s already lighting thousands of homes and creating thousands of jobs. We’re going to keep manufacturing more cars and trucks to get more miles to the gallon so that you can fill up once every two weeks instead of every week. We’re going to keep building more homes and businesses that waste less energy so that you’re in charge of your own energy bills.

We’re going to do all of this by harnessing our most inexhaustible resource: American ingenuity and American imagination. That’s what we need to keep going. That’s what’s at stake right now. That’s the choice that we face. And that’s the choice that’s facing Congress today. They can either vote to spend billions of dollars more in oil subsidies that keep us trapped in the past, or they can vote to end these taxpayer subsidies that aren’t needed to boost oil production so that we can invest in the future. It’s that simple.
And as long as I’m President, I’m betting on the future. And as the people I’ve talked to around the country, including the people who are behind me here today, they put their faith in the future as well. That’s what we do as Americans. That’s who we are. We innovate. We discover. We seek new solutions to some of our biggest challenges. And, ultimately, because we stick with it, we succeed. And I believe that we’re going to do that again. Today, the American people are going to be watching Congress to see if they have that same faith.

Thank you very much, everybody.

CNN White House Producer Alexander Mooney