Why is Bloom Energy Lying to Us?
Written by Hank Green on 24/02/10
Don't get me wrong, I'm extremely excited about Bloom Energy. I honestly think that their technology is a good thing for the world and that it might very well revolutionize the power infrastructure in America and throughout the world. And yes, it will create jobs and make a select few people very rich.
In fact, I think it's so revolutionary that it doesn't need to be inflated by false or misleading claims...which is why I'm a little put off by a few naughty little lies in the Bloom press release I got this morning.
Annoying press point #1: The Bloom Box "energy server" works with "nearly any fuel source." To me, "nearly any fuel source" means anything containing carbon/hydrogen compounds, ranging from gasoline to wood. The Bloom Box doesn't run on "nearly any fuel source" it runs on methane or methane or methane. That methane can be pumped out of the ground or captured from landfills, but it's still methane, and as I count it, that's one fuel source.
Annoying press point #2: Companies using the Bloom Box can "expect a three to five year payback on their capital investment." This is insane. The average cost per kW/h in California is 14 cents and Bloom promises a cost of roughly 9 cents. 100 kW multiplied by 8760 hours in a year times $0.05 per kW means 100 kW of continual electricity consumption over the course of the year will save a company a maximum of $45,000 per year. Call me crazy, but I don't see how they're going to pay for a $700,000 piece of equipment (even with a 50% government subsidy that won't last forever) over the course of three or five years by saving $45k per year.
Annoying press point #3: Probably what annoys me most about Bloom's press release is that they claim the box "provides a cleaner, more reliable, and more affordable alternative to both today’s electric grid as well as traditional renewable energy sources." Again, if it's not an outright lie, it's at least very misleading. The Bloom Box might be more reliable than both, but it isn't cheaper than the grid and it isn't cleaner than solar or wind. Marketing double-speak isn't good for anyone. If you take that sentence at face value, then you might as well cease all development of solar and wind and put 100% of the country's resources into Bloom Boxes.
Bloom Energy's technology is fantastic and exciting. It's much cleaner than our current electricity infrastructure and more practical than distributed solar. It's great, but there's no reason to make false claims when your product is this revolutionary.
By telling 60 Minutes that the device can run on solar power (Huh? How?) and saying that it doesn't perform "dirty combustion" they're implying that this is the same order of clean energy as solar or wind power. But it's simply not, they're turning hydrocarbons into carbon dioxide (and a host of other pollutants, of course) just like every other power plant in the world.
I'm tired of news organizations taking this press release at face value, but I'm even more annoyed that Bloom fed them all these exciting bits of B.S..
ecogeek.org |
