T&D Workshop

Subject: UFTO T&D Workshop
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 09:19:20 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>


A preliminary program concept and invitation

Subject: What’s needed on the T&D grid now and in the future

What do the Labs have to offer

(Topics to include: equipment, devices, systems, operations, maintenance, automation, materials, sensors, reliability, analysis, planning, etc., FOR THE GRID. Not generation, storage, end-use, etc.; distributed resources only to extent of assessing impact on the grid.)

Attendance: (by invitation)

— UFTO Member Reps and/or T&D Experts
— Federal Lab representatives
— (possible) Selected startups/vendors with new and innovative ideas and products

Purpose — A chance for:

— An informal dialogue and exchange of ideas;
— The market to say what it needs;
— The Labs to show what they have done and can do;
— Relationship building;
— Exploration of collaborative opportunities.

Place: Richland (Tri-Cities) WA, Pacific Northwest National Lab (PNNL) has offered to be the host.

Time: Week of October 21 or November 4. 1 1/2 days

(Optional/encouraged to stay on for tours, other meetings, etc.)

Costs: Own travel and accomodations.

(Possibly a small registration fee to cover meeting expenses.)

Format: Short presentations by both utility and lab attendees, with lots of roundtable discussion.

Success Measures: All attendees learn something useful; collaborations initiated; utilities adopt lab technology; labs gain better understanding of market needs; etc.

Background: UFTO member utility companies have seen detailed reports that describe the work at each of many Federal Labs, and this material has been well received. Now, their goal is to concentrate in a particular technical area, and bring together representatives and the technology offerings from across all the labs, for the purposes outlined above.

Though DOE is not currently funding T&D research, the labs have long experience, many exciting products, innovations and ideas, and technical expertise that can be brought to bear (e.g. systems analysis, sensors, materials, etc., just to name a few).


Please respond as soon as possible, by email, fax, or phone, on the following points:

1. Will someone from your organization be likely to attend? (If not, what changes would increase the likelihood?)

2. How does this sound to you? Is it a reasonable starting point? Any thoughts, suggestions?

3. Workshop Content:

Labs: What technologies would you like to present? What questions would you like answered?

UFTO Utilities: What areas would you like to have emphasized? Would you prepare a presentation on (some aspect) of industry needs? Would you help in the planning? Be chairperson?

4. Preferences on dates.

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |

Room Temp SC

Subject: UFTO Note — Room Temp SC
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 11:11:32 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>

Recalling that one of UFTO’s missions to to provide “early-warning radar”:

The text quoted below is from ROOTS (Room Temperature Superconductor) of Sebastopol CA. It’s part of an offering memo which can be found on the web at www.securitiesweb.com.

In your UFTO archives you’ll find a memo I wrote dated March 25, 1995 about this company. They do seem to be making significant progress, and say privately that they are getting very quiet attention from some of the top players in the field of superconductivity. They’re not in a position yet to handle big publicity, and hope they can keep things at a low profile for the time being.

If they are successful, you can say you heard it here first. Feel free to give me a call, or contact them directly.

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |


Magnetic Power Inc. – MPI




An MPI subsidiary, Room Temperature Superconductors Inc. (ROOTS), has begun commercial introduction of polymer, room-temperature, superconductors, following a decade of quiet laboratory research. These polymers enable breakthrough efficiencies for a perse range of electric systems and products, for example, to replace conventional copper wire and cable with plastic, superconducting, wire and cable.

MPI, the parent firm, is also readying near-term commercialization of technologically novel power generation and storage systems in which the Company has proprietary interests. Initially, these electric generation systems will address high-demand markets for residential, remote site and mobile power applications, including a recharge system for electric vehicles.


These technologies reflect a maturing of remarkable scientific and engineering breakthroughs. MPI commercial development focuses on systems which can demonstrate a competitive price, reasonable size, and on-site electric generation capabilities. Estimates of the worldwide potential power generation market range above $1 Trillion.

Room temperature superconductors, as predicted in the September ’95 and August ’96 issues of Scientific American, are likely to initiate a second industrial revolution. The markets for products incorporating refrigerated superconductors currently total $3 billion per year. These markets are predicted to grow to $8-12 billion by the year 2000.


“Cold fusion” is becoming a commercial reality. Laboratory models of one system, the Patterson Cell, will be available for purchase (from others) before the end of 1996. Japanese firms are leading the field, spending $100 million annually. Japan’s MITI is supporting research at SRI International in Palo Alto, California. The refereed journal Fusion Technology now devotes more than 25% of each issue to this emerging science. As with a handful of analogous systems, the heat produced tends not to exceed 300 degrees F.

These new sources of energy can use MPI’s advanced heat-to-electric transducers to yield electric power. The breakthrough thermoelectric modules can also be used with many existing sources of waste heat, such as power plants and industrial systems. MPI is also participating in the development of compact, solid-state, systems that produce electricity directly. A joint-venture involves ultra high energy magnets. Ancillary technology involves breakthrough, solid-state refrigeration, ultracapacitors, low-cost photovoltaics, energy storage and hydrogen storage systems. ROOTS ambient temperature superconductors, as well as most other technology, will be carried to the pilot plant level and then produced by strategic partners. Certain energy generating systems will normally be assembled by the company.


For two decades worldwide superconductor research has focused on raising operating temperatures above minus 200 degrees Fahrenheit. ROOTS polymer superconductors (which are marketed as Ultraconductors) operate at ambient temperatures above 300 degrees Fahrenheit, therefore requiring no cryogenic support systems. A landmark U.S. patent is pending covering the polymer room temperature superconductors.

At least four unaffiliated domestic companies are developing low-temperature heat producing systems which they believe have commercial potential. The company has proprietary solid-state, heat-to-electric, technology that incorporates the polymer superconductors to provide electric output. Significant intellectual property rights in pertinent technology have been obtained. The securing and protecting of world-wide patents is a primary goal.


These likely-to-be-cost-effective technologies open paths to a profound revolution in energy production and distribution. They are expected to help decentralize the production of electricity with many present utility customers substituting small on-site power plants. Electric cars will become very attractive. One scientist has stated that when 75 kilowatts (100 HP) can be generated in a car, a goal already on the horizon, his utility will begin to shut down their fossil fuel and nuclear plants and buy the necessary power from cooperating car owners while they are at work.


Management is well respected in the field of emerging electric power generating systems. Mark Goldes, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer, has more than 20 years of experience in the field. Ken Wooller, the Chief Operating Officer, has been CEO of a venture capital funded high-tech company. Kevin Shambrook, President of both firms, is a Ph.D. Electrical Engineer, with more than 30 years of experience including management of perse engineering and manufacturing projects, corporate planning and new product introduction. Steve Nett, Marketing Director, has many years of related experience.


Revenue Net Earnings

1996-97 1,000 -0-

1997-98 7,600 2,000

1998-99 17,000 5,000

1999-2000 54,000 14,000


A minimum of $2.65 million in additional capital is needed to take advantage of specific opportunities that will result in near-term products. The aggregate investment needed from accredited investors to support the parent company’s working capital for growth is approximately $1.35 million. In addition, ROOTS, the subsidiary developing the polymer room temperature superconductors is seeking $1.3 million. See below for contact information to request a Private Placement Memorandum and Subscription Letter, etc.


MPI completed a Phase I and in 1996 has a Phase II, USAF contract, involving near-term applications of the polymer room temperature superconductors. In addition, more than $2 million has been provided to date from private investors.


MPI and ROOTS presently share offices and laboratory facilities in Sebastopol, 50 miles north of San Francisco near Santa Rosa, California. ROOTS also supports a staff of scientists with three floors of laboratories in Moscow, Russia. Cooperative research and development is also under way at other laboratory facilities.


These are all technologies which are significantly more environmentally friendly than the existing systems that they will supplement and supplant. Commercial systems are initially expected to be small in size and safe to use for the powering of homes and cars. Later, multiple modules will produce larger amounts of power useful for business and industrial plants as well as trucks, buses, trains, boats, ships and eventually aircraft. The products involved will dramatically reduce pollution and decrease dependence on oil imports, helping to avoid future oil wars and perhaps reduce related terrorism. They will also provide a major reduction in the production of greenhouse gases when compared with today’s power generating and transmission technologies.

Contact Mark Goldes, Chairman and CEO, MPI & ROOTS, for additional information.

301A N. Main St. P.O. Box 880 Sebastopol CA 95473

707-829-9391 FAX 707-829-1002


Utilitree Carbon Co.

Subject: UFTO Note: Utilitree Carbon Co.– CO2 emissions management
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 13:14:32 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>

Interesting developments at EEI and the global climate initiatives–several of your companies are members of Utilitree. The contact points tend to be someone in environmental or communications. Let me know if you want more information.

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |


Gary Kaster of American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) has been named chairman of UtiliTree Carbon Company, a new non-profit organization comprised of 40 U.S. electric utilities dedicated to providing funding and oversight for projects which capture and store carbon dioxide emissions as a cost-effective response to concerns over global climate change.


Utility Forest Carbon Management Program/UtiliTree Carbon Company** (June 1996)

Trees are referred to as “carbon sinks,” because they take CO2 out of the air and sequester it in living plant tissue. About one-half of a tree is carbon. Carbon can be managed through many different types of forestry activities, including: forest preservation and management projects to reduce CO2 emissions and maintain carbon sequestered by reducing deforestation and harvest impacts; forest management to enhance existing carbon sinks; creation of new carbon sinks by planting on pasture, agricultural land or degraded forest sites; storing carbon in wood products; and energy conservation through shading buildings and homes.

The technical potential for forest carbon management is great, able to counteract a meaningful portion of the 3 Pg (1 Pg = 1 billion tonnes) carbon annual addition to the atmosphere. In addition, vigorous efforts to control land degradation in these areas could result in a net sequestration of up to one Pg carbon per year. Carbon offsets, properly documented and monitored, should be a major component of an international strategy to respond to GHG concerns.

The electric utility industry has a long history of involvement with traditional forest management and tree-planting programs, through preserving forest lands for both recreational use and wildlife habitat, tree maintenance around power lines, education of homeowners on tree placement around power lines, and commercial forestry on utility-owned lands. In association with events such as Earth Day and Arbor Day, many utilities supply seedlings for employees, children and others to plant. The utility industry owns a large amount of land in order to house and surround its current and future generation, transmission and distribution facilities.

Utilities have also recently initiated numerous forestry projects specifically to conserve energy and to offset CO2 emissions.6,7 A dozen or more utility companies are involved in urban forestry energy conservation programs such as American Forests’ Global ReLeaf and the DOE/American Forests’ Cool Communities. A few utility companies, such as the New England Electric System and PacifiCorp, have initiated forestry efforts targeted at managing carbon. The Southern Company is sponsoring research by the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute to investigate carbon sequestration rates, the long-term benefits of standing tropical forests, and the role of rain forests in tropical economies. In addition, some utilities are using biomass as a fuel to produce electricity.

In early 1995, many electric utilities entered into voluntary agreements under the Climate Challenge. Numerous of these voluntary commitments included forestry activities. For example, the American Electric Power Company committed to plant 15 million trees by the year 2000.

Some specific reasons for utilities to participate in forest carbon management include:

* There is a large technical potential for forest carbon management — a project can offset millions of tons of carbon emissions.

* Forestry options to manage carbon are cost effective in many cases — e.g., a few dollars per ton of carbon offset. Forest carbon management opportunities can be among the most economical ways to address CO2 emissions.

* Forestry carbon management adds flexibility, thus expanding the utility repertoire of options.

* Experience leads to improved future projects.

* Forestry projects yield positive public relations — using forestry to manage CO2 is well received by the public and environmental groups.

* Forestry efforts have positive secondary environmental and social benefits — e.g., restoration of degraded lands and protection of biopersity.

* International projects will help to demonstrate the effectiveness of joint implementation activities with other nations, which is a critical tool for economically addressing GHG issues.

* As is the case with this initiative, joint sponsorship of projects by many utilities also means that risk is shared.

The Utility Forest Carbon Management Program (UFCMP) is an initiative developed by EEI, with support from 55 electric utilities, to expand utility industry efforts to manage CO2 via forestry projects, both domestic and international. The goals of the program are to:

* Advance the state of knowledge regarding options for managing GHG’s via forestry.

* Establish low-cost forestry options to manage GHG’s.

* Implement projects to manage GHG’s.

* Promote environmental stewardship by the utility industry, including helping to demonstrate that a voluntary approach to environmental protection can work.

The UFCMP developed criteria and a process to review proposed projects and, subsequently, a request for proposals was issued to hundreds of inpiduals and organizations in February 1995. Thirty-two proposals were received in March 1995 and reviewed by the UFCMP committees, an outside consultant and, to a limited extent, by the UFCMP Advisory Council (representatives from nine non-utility organizations — American Forests, Resources for the Future, Trees Forever, Society of American Foresters, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute, U.S. Country Studies Program, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and USDA Forest Service). Proposed projects were located in the U.S., Central America, South America and Asia.

Technical criteria address project GHG calculations, monitoring, contingency plans, and non-GHG impacts, as well as project developer qualifications and experience. The full life cycle of project GHG emissions and emission reductions must be specified, addressing “leakage” and the fate of harvested biomass. The cost-effectiveness of the project in terms of $ per ton CO2 managed is a key project characteristic.

After technical review was completed, projects were ranked and eventually a “pool” of six projects emerged as the final product for which utility sponsorship would be sought. Subsequently, UFCMP members and non-member utilities were asked to provide cooperative funding. A new non-profit corporation called the UtiliTree Carbon Company was established by 40 utilities to sponsor the projects. The projects in the final pool represent a perse mix of rural tree planting, forest preservation, forest management and research efforts at both domestic (eastern and western U.S.) and international sites.

The UtiliTree Carbon Company has committed slightly over $2.4 million to fund the pool of projects. CO2 will be managed at a cost of under $1 per ton, including administrative expenses. Participants will share on a pro rata basis the reporting of carbon reductions into the voluntary Energy Policy Act section 1605(b) data base. In addition, a data base will be developed to report the GHG benefits of all utility forest management projects.

** excerpt from (taken from EEI web page):

“A Status Report on Climate Challenge Program’s Voluntary Initiatives to Manage U.S. Electric Utility Greenhouse Gases”; Presentation at 89th Annual Meeting & Exhibition Air & Waste Management Association Nashville, Tennessee, June 1996; John D. Kinsman, Michael McGrath, Richard McMahon, Michael Rucker, Ronald Shiflett and Richard Tempchin; Edison Electric Institute, 701 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20004-2696

Whole Tree Energy

Subject: UFTO Note: Whole Tree Energy
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 13:18:18 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>

Whole Tree Energy

Whole Tree Energy(tm) is a large-scale, baseload electrical energy production technology that is CO2 closed loop. The scale, cost, and efficiency of Whole Tree Energy(tm) rival those of the leading fossil fuel technologies. Optimally sized at 100-200 MW, its power could cost less than 4¢/kwh.

Fast-growing hybrid trees are grown, harvested and handled by special techniques, to provide the fuel for a patented electric energy conversion system that has almost no emissions and actually subtracts net carbon from the atmosphere (some carbon is sequestered in leaves and roots).

The entire system, from tree farming through generation of electricity, is in an advanced state of development. All the technology is proven, and much of it patented. Negotiations are underway for a power purchase contract for the first 50 MW power plant project. The firm has an aggressive business plan for international expansion, and is seeking investment capital and business partners in this highly responsible and profitable venture.

Additional information is available from the company:

Energy Performance Systems, Minneapolis MN, 612-533-0503, fax 533-1530

(Also see the EPRI Journal, January 1994.)

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |

News: Fuel Cell Conferences

Subject: UFTO News: Fuel Cell conferences
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 13:52:57 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>

Forwarding a notice from the METC fuel cell forum, FYI

| ***UFTO **** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |


Subject: Fuel Cell conferences
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 16:00:47 -0400
To: fuelcells@delphi.metc.doe.gov

Hi Group:

At the METC fuel cell review I learned of three new conferences. Two have a short time announcement. The first conference registration is due August 28. This is the “Fuel Cells for Power and Propulsion” held in London on September 24. This short program deals with fuel cells in the power plant size range for MCFC, SOFC, PAFC’s. For further information

Ellis Lloyd Payne

Conference and Events Department


1 Birdcage Walk
London, SW1H9JJ
Phone +44 (0) 171 973 1304
Fax: +44 (0) 171 233 1654
The second is a call for papers issued for the “Fifth International Symposium on Solid Oxide Fuel Cells” in Aachen, Germany June 2-5 1997. Papers are solicited on all aspects of Solid Oxide Fuel Cells. Included are; cell design, modeling, systems, chemistry, performance. A 75-word abstract should be submitted by October 1.

Secretariat-SOFC V
c/o Dr. Werner Lehnert
Institute of Energy Process Engineering (IEV)
Research Center Julich (KFA)
D-52425 Julich, Germany
phone: 49 2461 61 5147
Fax: 49 2461 61 6695
e-mail w.lehnert@kfa-juelich.de

The third conference also is short notice with registration due August 30. This is “Distributed Electric Generation” in which fuel cells will play a major role. The conference will discuss economic factors and customer preferences. Fuel cells are part of the current technology. The conference will be held September 30-October 1, 1996 at the

DoubleTree Hotel
Pentagon City National Airport
Arlington, VA 22202

Further information

King Communications Group, Inc.
627 National Press Building, E-14
Washington, D.C. 20045
phone (800) 926-5464
(202) 662-9710
fax (202) 662-9719
e-mail kingcomm@dgs.dgsys.com


Note: Real Time Video Tower Monitor

Subject: UFTO Note: Real Time Video Tower Monitor
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 13:58:14 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>

Real Time Video Tower Monitor System

A local company here in Silicon Valley has outlined this new concept and wants to see what the utility industry’s level of interest would be.

Imagine that you could have a video camera on each and every transmission tower, sending real time images that would provide warnings about weather, forest fires, sabotage or other suspicious activity, and mechanical and electrical phenomena at the site. Sensor data could also be provided, such as temperatures, wind, stresses and strains, EM fields, etc.

This is a very different approach to maintaining, operating and monitoring equipment that rarely has a problem, but when it does, the consequences are large. Recall instances where storms have pulled down miles and miles of towers in remote areas where the only access is by helicopter. A decision to take the line out of service might have been possible, avoiding the shock to the rest of the system. Better yet, there may be things that could be done dynamically to minimize damage. At the very least, repairs could be undertaken with far better information about the problems at hand.

Instead of the usual periodic inspections and repairs, we’re talking about real time monitoring. This hasn’t been considered feasible to date (except for very special and isolated situations) because of the high costs and technical challenges, but suppose those problems were solved.

Clearly, this would have to be cheap and readily integrated into operations. The low power devices would not require grid connection–a small battery/PV panel would suffice. The technical details are highly proprietary at this point, but assume for sake of discussion that it really can be done cheaply and reliably.

Suppose it were offered as a service by a third party, who would install and operate the system and provide filtered or analyzed data and alarm condition warnings as appropriate.

The question is, would you be interested in this kind of capability? What would the value be? What would you be willing to pay for such a capability (e.g., $ per month per tower)?

Your reactions and those of experts in your company would be much appreciated.

Contact: Edward Beardsworth, 415-328-5670, edbeards@batnet.com

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |

Tech Nuggets – Energy Storage Association

Subject: UFTO Tech Nuggets 8/13/96
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 16:14:08 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>



The Utility Battery Group has now been renamed as the Energy Storage Association (ESA). The name change reflects a broader view to encompass flywheels, smes, and other energy storage technology. This year’s chairman is Chuck Ward of Oglethorpe Power.

The next meeting is scheduled at Amelia Island (30 miles from Jacksonville, Florida) for November 11-13, coinciding with an EPRI/Oglethorpe meeting on power quality. The technical agenda will focus on power electronics, and include a tour of th PQ2000 Battery Storage Project in Homerville GA.

You should very seriously consider joining ESA if you haven’t already, as a very effective way to keep informed and in the loop of developments in the rapidly emerging field, especially as it relates to UPS, power quality, and the prospect of real customer side storage. Currently, it is $1000 for a company membership, which also covers meeting registration fees.

The Executive Director is Jon Hurwitch, of Switch Technologies, Bethesda MD, 301-951-3231, fax 301-951-3235.

CREAM2 Test Case Free to EPRI Members

For members of the the SSOS business unit of EPRI (to be renamed GOP — Sorry, I have no idea what these initials mean) — Power Systems Research is doing the new version of EPRI’s CREAM model (renamed EPRI-PWR), and needs member utility volunteers for a free test run on your system or part of it. CREAM evaluates supply reliability of a power system, taking into account both generation and transmission outages, providing a consistent framework for analyzing transmission access and wheeling issues, establishing marginal cost prices at bus level, and analyzing tradeoffs between generation and transmission reinforcements.

Contact: Ali Vojdani, EPRI, 415-855-2838, or Mike McCoy, PSRI, Portland OR, 503-223-1720.

| *** UFTO *** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |


Subject: UFTO TECH NUGGETS 8/7/96
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 1996 13:58:36 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@batnet.com>


Powersystems World Conference:

** Powersystems World ’96 is a major conference in Las Vegas, September 7-13, covering power quality, power conversion, power electronics, alternate energy and storage and power value. It’s actually five conferences in one, including a variety of course offerings, technical sessions, and exhibits from over 200 companies. Tel 805-650-7070, fax 805-650-7054, or check out the complete program on the web at


Site Characterization:

** EPA’s VendorFACTS 1.0 is a database of innovative site characterization technologies, available free on diskettes or via downloading. It contains information provided by vendors on the applicability, performance and current use of their products, including portable and transportable technologies for on-site screening, characterizing, monitoring and analysis of hazardous substances. It does not include equipment for off-site analysis or for monitoring industrial process streams.

Call 800-245-4505 or 703-883-8448

| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth * Consultant |
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670 |
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675 |