Greentech Media

  • Follow:
Latest Update: 2 days ago 5:17 PM

Perspectives |  Top 10

Eric Wesoff: August 28, 2010

Update! 15 PowerPoint Slides That Shook the Earth

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

Update! 15 PowerPoint Slides That Shook the Earth

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.

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.  We also added a few additional slides that we left out during the first, second and third go-rounds.

 

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.

 

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."


 

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:

 

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 35 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.

60 Comments

  • JoeJoe 07/8/10 1:24 PM

    This is an iconic piece guys. Some of you green tech guys should include some slides of what real world grid disturbances look like. Loosing the DC tie or a reactor scram under heavy load for example. Integrating renewables is challenging but running the grid is challenging as it is.

     Reply
  • Michael 07/8/10 2:05 PM

    Two other slides should have been on your list: 1. Art Rosenfeld’s slide about per capita energy consumption being flat in CA since the 1970s while the rest of the US has grown substantially. 2. US from space @ night showing all the lights on.

     Reply
  • samjaffe 07/8/10 2:48 PM

    Excellent piece. I would add the slide that shows how all the great tech companies (from HP to Apple to Google) were created in the midst of a recession. It’s not an energy slide, but I’ve seen it in every energy company presentation from 2007 through today.

     Reply
      • Doug Caldwell 07/8/10 3:13 PM

        I’d like to know the basis for such a statement.  Looking up companies and recessions in Wiki, we find:
          HP: founded 1939—the Great Depression was past as was the Recession of 1937-1938;
          Apple: founded 1976—the recession of the early ‘70s ended in early 1975;
          Google: created ‘95-‘97 (corporate website); founded 1998—the nearest recessions end in 1991 and start in 2001.

        So while such a claim might be made in many (or even every) energy company presentation recently, it probably speaks more to PowerPoint facilitating mindless cutting and pasting than to a valid business point.  If such a chart shows up in an investor presentation, it’s probably a nice red flag about the business knowledge of the entrepreneur (or about his willingness to bend reality to fit the message he wants to send).
  • Rafael 07/8/10 2:59 PM

    Another very compelling slide about our dear planet is a photo NASA produced of Earth as seen from beyond Saturn—it is a tiny spec that could easily be mistakenly seen as part of one of the rings. I don’t have it—but if someone does, appreciate if share it with the rest of us! A great reminder of how tiny and fragile and amazing Earth is

     Reply
  • Uma Subramaniam 07/8/10 3:05 PM

    Wonderful, Eric. How often is something, fun, informative, and eminently reusable! And, yes, you should have included Art Rosenfeld’s slide about per capita energy consumption. That’s been used, and used, and reused.

     Reply
  • ECD Fan 07/8/10 3:09 PM

    The NREL’s solar cell efficiencies slide has done some extreme damage to many investors.  For example, the slide shows that United Solar allegedly had a 12%-efficient cell in year 2000.  Fast forward to 2010: United Solar’s most efficient module is just 6.7% efficient.  And, of course, let’s not forget how AstroPower ended!

     Reply
  • Eric C. 07/8/10 3:11 PM

    A great, graphic summing up! I saw the McKinsey slide twice last week, in different places in Germany.

     Reply
  • Bryan Hannegan 07/8/10 3:17 PM

    The smart grid slide comes courtesy of EPRI - glad to see we made the top ten list!

     Reply
      • eck138 07/8/10 4:21 PM

        The slide came from Southern California Edison.  It was passed around by EPRI
  • gotmercury? 07/8/10 3:20 PM

    These are not ppt slides, but two powerful photos: 1) the extent of summer Arctic ice melt, 2) the collapsing Antarctic ice shelf.

     Reply
  • glenn2ns 07/8/10 3:37 PM

    Love it! Reminds me of the Photonics Spectra “Peregrinations” ($10 to 1st to define it)

     Reply
  • Rob Irwin 07/8/10 3:39 PM

    I would have liked to have seen the GPI, or Genuine Progress Indicator Graph illustrating the GPI against the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) from the 50’s to 2002. As the GDP has increased (percieved “progress”) the peoples “happiness” for their overall wellbeing and prosperity has remained relatively the same (30% satisfied). My reasoning for this, lay in the question, “the means to what end.”
    thanks

     Reply
      • JoeJoe 07/8/10 4:15 PM

        The HDI graph with electricity use plotted against “happiness” is another good slide. Probably more of an NGO/UN type slide. It shows a leveling off past 4000 kWh/year. This graph isn’t perfect but it indicates that the correlation between energy use and well being only goes so far. This suggests we should have a rational long term goal for energy use per capita. Where does more is better stop being true? I don’t know, somewhere. You don’t need a set in stone goal - just a reasonable goal. This would help steer efficiency standards and whatnot.

        http://www.indianjournals.com/showdocument.aspx?target=publication&type=articleimage&id=in-3-1-001-fig001.jpg
  • Jim McD 07/8/10 3:46 PM

    Excellent! Another candidate for inclusion would be the fake ‘ISAT Geostar’ image of the 8/14/03 northeast blackout.

     Reply
  • Ski Milburn 07/8/10 4:54 PM

    These are all good, but I nominate Sequoia Capital’s “RIP Good Times” as the single most damaging slide deck in recent memory. It’s like these guys thought they had a God-given right to make lots of easy money and then woke up one day to discover that the fundamental economics underlying their business stunk and they weren’t nearly smart enough to have a clue what to do about it other than panic.  As the contagion spread around the world around the world it spooked a lot of Limited Partners and a lot of VCs .

    It hurt everybody, but especially Cleantech, as these companies already had long, expensive and risky start-up cycles to deal with, that were being exacerbated by the global financial crisis.

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/8/10 5:24 PM

        Ski - that one definitely occurred to me.  It just seemed kind of clueless on their part.  I’m contemplating updating the list to top 15 and that one will get included.
  • Liz Merry 07/8/10 5:09 PM

    This is awesome Eric - thanks! Maybe we (meaning—> you), could host a SlideShare or GTM page for people’s favorite renewable-energy related slides (either borrowed or self-generated). I’d contribute several. It’s for the ‘greater good’ like your Smart Grid slide. Raises the content quality in general. Fun stuff for sure.

     Reply
  • SmartJohn 07/8/10 5:12 PM

    Wonderful Eric! It would have been nice to cite authoritative sources for the slide origins for the benefit of historians and a high res image so they can be further repropagated.
    Although it does speak to the ubiquity of these slides that they shuffle around taken for granted.

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/8/10 5:25 PM

        SmartJohn—
        I will revise the list with better citations.
        Eric
  • Kelly 07/8/10 5:15 PM

    These are cute.

    Listen, I have an idea for a story you guys should do on energy management applications. I think there are a lot of similarities between consumer apps for managing finances (Mint, Quicken, Wesabe) and energy - data security, reliability, visualization, remote access, etc. I would be very interested in an article where you interviewed execs at some finance app companies and extrapolated lessons into the energy space. Marc Hedlund from (now shutdown) Wesabe would be a good start.

    Just a thought, but you heard it here first…

     Reply
  • Keith.B 07/8/10 7:52 PM

    A slide that I think will have influence on our energy future is the “J” curve slide showing the number of automobiles purchased annually in China. Not forgetting China bought more automobiles then USA last year and damn that “J” trajectory looks steep. Whoa, China is going to need whole lot of petroleum, hope a majority of the autos are EVs.

     Reply
  • Ramesh Gopalan 07/9/10 10:42 AM

    The first slide should be the ‘Hockey Stick’ - correlating sharp increase in atmosphere CO2 with the start of the Industrial Revolution - 200 years ago, after lying flat for 10000 years previously.  And the global temperature rise on top it (less convincing, but key anyway).
      I cant paste it here, usually on the NYTimes.com website…

     Reply
  • CM 07/9/10 11:14 AM

    That ACORE slide is actually one I produced for SEIA in 2005,  (just taking the then-available images at http://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvgis/countries/europe.htm and recoloring them in Photoshop to match the NREL index.)  Email me and I can send you the original.

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/9/10 11:36 AM

        Please send the original to (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
  • DW 07/9/10 12:08 PM

    What?  No graph of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) mandates?

     Reply
  • Edgar A. Gunther 07/9/10 3:30 PM

    I am a big fan of the Greentech Media’s smart grid ecosystem slide and have used it on occasion. Best one pager I’ve seen.

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/9/10 5:37 PM

        Thanks Ed.  Kudos to our DJ Leeds and Rick Thompson.
  • Adam 07/9/10 3:38 PM

    Not a fan of the solar or PEV slides.  On the solar, the relevant fluctuation is not a single solar panel, but a substation region with lots of solar collection, for which the fluctuations averaged over hundreds of commercial/residential rooftops will be minimal.

    On the PEV slide, you could just as easily say:

    Home Clothes Driers Create a Significant Increase in Load
    Customers will prefer a 240V drier to shorten drying time
    Drying clothes is a large load for PG&E customers, comparable to the average peak summer load of a single home

    It means that widespread clothes drier usage can’t happen without a smart grid drier infrastructure.

    Given that there’s already infrastructure for home clothes drying and other use at *peak* power, and most people will use home car chargers at night when the rest of their household load is minimal, I’d argue that we already have all the infrastructure we need.  I defy you to show me a municipality where 80% of homes (with cars parked near electrical outlets) can’t already run 240V/15A from 11 PM to 7 AM with no changes to the existing infrastructure.  And in fact, this would far better use installed electrical capacity—including overnight wind peaks and zero-GHG nuclear which would otherwise have nothing better to do than pumping water up a hill.

     Reply
      • Bob Wallace 08/29/10 1:26 PM

        Adam, I basically agree with you.

        But there may be a problem with shortened transformer life in some parts of the distribution grid.  Currently some transformers are undersized for 24 hour operation, it has been expected that they would be allowed to cool down at night.
  • Wilson 07/9/10 5:25 PM

    It would have been useful if the discussion were how these slides have “shaken the world,” i.e. actually caused changes by people.  All we’re told is these are used widely, which doesn’t mean they necessarily, at least individually, have any other effect than buzz.

     Reply
  • E. Gilliam 07/10/10 1:45 PM

    Some fantastic examples. I wish you didn’t feel the need to compare yourself to Tufte: he didn’t actually create the iconic chart about temperature and Napoleon’s army; he only shamelessly makes money from selling the graph another guy did (long enough ago it’s not protected by copyright). He doesn’t do anything more than talk about others’ ideas. And at least Greentech has its own creation in this list.

     Reply
  • Moyez 07/12/10 7:10 AM

    Great slides! How or where can I get a copy of all the slides? Thankx

     Reply
  • Mark M 07/12/10 10:46 AM

    Eric,
    Thanks for updating the article to include the Rosenfled slide.  I have lived in CA for the last 30 years in the temperate Bay Area as well as in the warmer in the summer and much colder in the winter Sierra foothills.  There is no question that CA’s efforts to improve the efficiency of appliances, lighting, etc., combined with energy efficient building standards have played a major role in reducing the demand for electrical energy in state on a per capita basis.  An article by Cynthia Mitchcell, et al entitled “Stabilizing CA Demand- The real reasons behind the state’s energy savings” http://www.fortnightly.com/exclusive.cfm?o_id=159 is an enlightening review of the factors that influenced the stable kw/capita usage in CA. 
    As you know the price of electrical energy can be a bit expensive out here in CA if you happen to use above 130% of the magic baseline amount (residential users).  After an uproar in the southern central valley last year from PG&E customers paying close to $.50 a kw in the summer for their marginal electrical usage PG&E decided the penalty for using above 200% of baseline quantities shouldn’t be so steep (from $.11/Kw at base line to $.40 now- vs .50 before June, 2010).  It will be interesting to see how the PUC will be weighing the right to inexpensive power that has been legislated (essentially the baseline electrical prices and low income rights to cheap power) with the goals for reducing green house gas emissions (AB 32) and the mandate for 33% renewables. 
    As always thanks for providing thought provoking articles (and great reference materials).

     Reply
  • Rick N 07/12/10 5:35 PM

    I nominate the EPRI “prism” slide - have seen it countless times…

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/17/10 2:49 AM

        I’ve presented the EPRI Prism slide countless times
  • haryybell bell 07/13/10 6:50 AM

    Really a educative and informative post, the post is good in all regards,I am glad to read this post.

    Reply
  • MzPhyz 07/13/10 10:06 AM

    What?!?!? No Carbon Wedges slide? I thought it was required by law in any renewable or conventional energy talk! See: cmi.princeton.edu/wedges/Wedges_slides_8.ppt.

    Or just google “Carbon Wedges ppt” :-).

     Reply
  • Venerable Bede 07/14/10 6:54 PM

    I take a bit of an issue with the Rosenfeld slide as there are good arguments, as noted above by the link to the Cynthia Mitchell article, that a good percentage of that “flat per capita growth” can be attributed to the fleeing of manufacturing from California rather than the investments in energy efficiency and codes and standards.

     Reply
      • Mark M 07/15/10 2:32 PM

        Venerable,

        I concur with your read of the article that a large portion of the savings is the change in the industries in the state- there is a reason Intel says they will not build any production facility in CA (the high costs of doing business here).  We went solar four years ago after a few $700.00/month electrical bills.  We cut of demand a bit (about 15%, by changing out lighting, insulating, etc.) but going with a NET FIT meter (e-7) from PG&E will not be shown in the Rosenfeld graph.  We generate about 60% of our yearly demand now.
  • Sierra Fong 07/16/10 2:12 PM

    I’m so glad you included the Tufte examples. To respond to another commenter, of course Tufte did not create any slides that shook the earth, but instead he appropriately explained to countless students of information design why and how certain information sets work. He uses examples with explanations and studies that have been mainstays in my professional work, including the first image of this post, which is the mapping of Napoleon’s army, and a concise, incredibly communicative example it is.

    Information graphics should be immediately understandable and contain all the information you need. That’s what people react to. In the Spaghetti Monster slide, we’re not reacting to each line, but rather what the whole picture tells us.

     Reply
  • Chuck Sathrum 07/19/10 1:04 PM

    Excellent slides and photos! One of my biggest challenges (remember, plagiarism saves time) is to locate these and other high impact materials in ready-to-use PowerPoint format (rather than cut and paste).  Any resources or links out there?  And, yes, I promise not to read my slides to the audience.

     Reply
  • Mike M. 07/21/10 10:28 PM

    A great set of slides indeed, but I must take exception to the assertion that: “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.” First of all, the definition of “fast” is key to interpretation. If 50 years is “fast” then yes, “something is happening and it’s happening fast.” But in the grand scheme of things (millennia—not years, decades or even centuries!), I don’t think you can draw any meaningful conclusions from this so-called trend. (50 years does not constitute a trend except for that 50-year period.) There are countless “trends” that if presented in relatively “short” (rhymes with “fast” as used above) time slices like this would suggest some pretty scary scenarios if taken out of context. For example, how do you think the air quality in Oregon looked after the last Mt. St. Helens eruption? I’m all for conservation, efficiency, environmental protection… all that stuff—100%. But let’s try to keep it in a proper perspective by not overstating the significance of 50 years out of 50 million. Show me that plot in a 1,000-year period, and if it still stands out, maybe then it qualifies as Earth-shaking.

     Reply
  • KipB 07/26/10 4:41 PM

    Thanks.  Note that CO2 is “see oh two” and not “see zero two”.  The “O” stands for Oxygen and it’s not a zero.  C02 and CO2 do look different.  See EPRI Prism and Carbon Wedge above.

     Reply
      • Eric Wesoff 07/26/10 7:49 PM

        0K KipB.  Fixed.
  • Bob Wallace 08/29/10 1:12 PM

    The wind power flying spaghetti monster.

    Let’s see this one with connected wind farms distributed over a 100-200 mile range.  And over a larger area as one might get when using wind energy from the Great Planes along with the Texas Panhandle.

    Output from one single wind farm is not the real world, it’s as misleading as graphing the demand curve from one single house over days and using that to make a statement about the variability of demand….

     Reply
  • creativforce 08/30/10 11:10 AM

    Am I reading the Livermore slide right?  Is “Rejected Energy” the politically correct way to say wasted energy?  If this is true, utilities waste 88% of the energy in the fuel they burn to produce energy.  That’s staggering! 

    Why is anyone promoting a smart grid when the grid is so inherently stupid?  Wouldn’t it make more sense to make electricity at the point of use by burning natural gas from a pipleine?  Even a cheap natural gas powered generator running at 35% efficiency whould be a better use of resources than a central utility plant. And a fuel cell running at 90% efficiency in the home would be a total game changer.

     Reply
      • Philipp 08/30/10 2:18 PM

        if you could only use all that heat that is generated…then you would get 90% efficiency. but a usual household does not need that much heat. so you can produce all the heat the household needs, but you will not be able to cover the households electricity needs. so your machine is not running all the time, so wasted capital costs.
        a big natural gas plant can easily improve its efficiency if it is providing heat to surrounding residential or commercial buildings. of course you can only do that in densely populated cities, so that the cost of piping are not prohibitive. often done in german cities, btw, where efficiency is, if I am not mistaken, up in the 90ies. another reason why the concept of suburbia sucks…
  • Bruce 08/30/10 2:35 PM

    Great article. Even better if the actual slide (or a readable-sized PDF) had been linked to the original in the article.

     Reply
  • Mark Hadley 08/31/10 7:25 AM

    I hope everyone talking about these slides has, at least, installed solar power to supplement their usage. I am sick of talking when it’s so easy doing. From one who’s back yard renewable generator delivers more power than his residence uses.
    http://www.earthbilly.com

     Reply
Need an avatar? Get one here: Gravatar

Related Content

Most Popular

    Articles

  1. The Sunset of Solar Venture Capital

    08 31 10

  2. EV Batteries Plummet in Price: Down to $400 a kwH

    08 31 10

  3. With Arch Rock Purchase, Cisco Takes Aim at Silver Spring Networks

    09 02 10

  4. The Biggest Green Market? Seven Reasons Why It's Green IT

    09 02 10

  5. California Fails to Pass 33 Percent Renewable Standard, But Arnold May Intervene

    09 01 10

    Discussions

  1. Why Conservatives Are Bad on Energy: It's All About the Costs

    08 30 10 86

  2. Update! 15 PowerPoint Slides That Shook the Earth

    08 28 10 60

  3. Ethanol or Electric Cars? The Debate Isn't Over, Says GM

    08 23 10 28

  4. The Sunset of Solar Venture Capital

    08 31 10 26

  5. Update Aug 27: California Energy Storage Bill AB 2514 Passes

    08 27 10 25