The New Energy Congress is a site that addresses the bleeding edge of new energy and does a good job of updating things already onsite. Most interesting is the page of the Top 100 Technologies, which is a voted on list that ranks the technologies from 1 to 100.

The Logo For The New Energy Congress

The Logo For The New Energy Congress

I check the news page every few days to see what might be worthy of some attention. The site is organized much like a wikipedia with a page for each technology with links, perhaps some opinion, background facts and other bits. The pages range from thorough to frustrating which is no fault of the site webmaster. I have to wonder if the site is an effort of care and interest as there must be huge burden to stay current with just a pittance of advertising revenue to support the work. With no blogs, no blogroll, the site makes an effort to be as factual as possible, although some entries are borderline fanciful, at least so far. Also of note is that New Energy Congress is a creature operating with Pure Energy Systems, a kind of publishing effort.

In fact, the past year has seen the site mature. A year ago the hydrogen kit guys held sway, and as valid as making “Brown’s” gas can be, the site has finally grown out to view much more of the vast world of energy and in some cases – fuels.

Now with over a half-year of experience the votes that set the ranking have a bit of reality. Bear in mind the votes here are the web site’s enthusiasts as a source, so have little to do with hard analytical facts. But the exciting thing looking over the list is the inclusiveness of it. From planetary geothermal to solar, battery and ultracapacitor storage, on to the biomass and renewables with fission and fusion plus an array of ideas and concepts for new power devices – there is a lot here. It is a kind of link heaven to boot.

On the other hand much thought has gone into the “Criteria” used to review and assess technologies. While its inclusive by necessity the list remains elementary in scope. By no means does the site present conclusive winners. In fact the list is an ongoing, dynamic and updating effort. What will be most valid is staying power. If the list gets a few years use with a gradual increase in the substantialization of the criteria, then the value will increase dramatically. But the participation would always be suspect, so perhaps the enthusiast voter is the most valid after all. Due diligence for the large majority of information is simply out of reach or premature. Gut instinct does still play a roll at the very edge of innovation.

I’m looking forward to the site’s continued growth and soundness. Admittedly I was put off for a very long time with all the hydrogen kit stuff. I understand that – as even here they used to swamp out other advertisers and load huge numbers (Thousands!) of spam comments. One has to wait them out I suppose. New Energy Congress might grow to be the Wikipedia of energy ideas some day. In the meantime you may want to vote over there. Just take a moment, browse the list and post a comment here about which of those potentates should be main topics for the billions of people looking into the future and point out any obvious missing contenders.


1 Comment so far

  1. Sterling D. Allan, CEO on January 22, 2009 5:28 PM

    Thanks for the coverage and the frank assessment. It is helpful to us as we seek to improve what we have.

    A couple of corrections.

    Presently, the list voting is populated only by members of the New Energy Congress, who are clean energy professionals. We do plan to eventually allow the public to vote, but will have a weighing mechanism whereby the validity of their vote will be a function of their reputation among peers; and the NEC votes will hold a strong majority of the weight.

    Also, I would dare say that we are already the Wikipedia of Clean Energy Technology. I’ve never seen a site that comes even close to what we have in breakthrough renewable energy technology coverage that is publicly editable.

    Come help us get even better.

Name (required)

Email (required)


Speak your mind