Why an EU renewable energy plan needs solar power

WHY AN EU RENEWABLE ENERGY PLAN NEEDS SOLAR POWER

Background to EU energy issues -

Climate science points to a reduction in carbon emissions of at least 80% by 2050. In practice, this will require the decarbonisation of at least 90% of most types of EU energy supplies. The average energy useage in the EU is currently about 125 kwhr/person/day (IEA).   By 2050, it is reasonable to expect efficiency savings and mode alteration to reduce this energy consumption to about 100 kwhr/person/ day, which is equivalent to 4kW continuous mean power consumption per person.

The current population of the EU27 is 500M  (Eurostat). So by 2050, the EU primary energy use will be of the order of 500M+  x  4 kW =   2000+ GW mean

There is insufficient uranium ore to power a nuclear powered future, even if that were desirable, as 1000 GW of conventional nuclear power can only be fuelled for about 15 years with the currently known sources of ore.  CCS is an unknown quantity and it is unlikely that the massive scale of CO2 sequestration required could be achieved on this scale, even if it were desirable. So huge renewable energy sources are essential………………….

full article at http://www.claverton-energy.com/why-an-eu-renewable-energy-plan-needs-solar-power.html

 

The Smart Grid’s coming electric economy

The Utilities’ View of the Smart Grid

By Nick Hodge
Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

The economy of yesterday was dependent on access to cheap petroleum. The economy of tomorrow will be dependent on access to cheap, reliable electricity.

Consider this nugget of crucial information: In the 1950s, 40% of the U.S. economy relied on electricity. Today, fully two-thirds (66%) of our economy depends on it.

And we haven’t even electrified our transportation yet.

Such was the backdrop for high-level talks at GreenBeat 2009, where I had the chance to talk about the future of electricity with some of the brightest (and wealthiest) in the biz.

Last week, we took a look at Google’s perspective and entrance into the electricity arena. Today, we’ll take a look at the utility perspective.

Smart Grid and The Economy

While I heard from many venture capitalists and smart grid product providers, I must say it was a pleasure to get the utilities’ take on things. After all, when it comes to the smart grid, the utility is the customer.

The session began with a primer on the current status of the grid. Basically, we’ve been living for 100 years with grid 1.0, the electro-mechanical analog version that dumbly pushed power along……………

Full financial story at http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/utilities-smart-grid-economy/1029?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+eacfeed+%28Energy+and+Capital%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

Reserves are bunk

Sunday, December 06, 2009

Henry Ford is famous for having once said, “History is more or less bunk.” He was, in fact, attacking tradition in an age of rapid technological and social change. Almost a century later we have a less ambitious observation which may not achieve the broad visceral appeal of Ford’s statement, but one which may turn out to have a good deal of importance, to wit: Oil and natural gas reserve numbers are more or less bunk.

Let me introduce you to B. J. Doyle, vice president of operations for a small Houston-based oil and natural gas exploration company. Doyle’s views on the oil and gas business have been on display for more than a year now at The Oil Drum, a site famous for its technical prowess and breadth of coverage when it comes to energy-related issues. On the site Doyle goes by the moniker Rockman, and through his frequent comments he has been trying to educate readers about the realities of the oil and gas business.

Now, he didn’t actually say that oil and natural gas reserve numbers are more or less bunk. Nevertheless, that is a fair summary of what he told me when I spoke with him recently. To understand why an insider would cast aspersions on this sacred metric of the oil and gas industry, you need to know two things. First, Doyle doesn’t have to please shareholders. The company he works for is privately held. Second, reserve numbers are meaningless unless they are indexed to a price.

Doyle began his explanation with a seemingly astounding statement: “One of the things we’re least interested in is the amount of oil and gas that we are going to produce.” How can this possibly be true? It turns out that the oil and gas industry uses a method common to nearly every modern business enterprise to evaluate its investments, namely, net present value analysis or NPV.

The concept is actually simple. If you have the choice of receiving $1,000 now or $1,000 three years from now, naturally you’d take the $1,000 today. That’s because of what is called the time value of money. If you can invest the $1,000 today, say, in a bank CD, you can at least earn some interest in the next three years. Also, if you were foolish enough to wait for your money, inflation might undermine the purchasing power of that $1,000. The inflation calculator at the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that it would take $1,072 in 2009 to equal the purchasing power of $1,000 received in 2006……………

Full story at http://resourceinsights.blogspot.com/2009/12/reserves-are-bunk.html

 

Boiling Point: what to do about looming water shortages?

By Ana Campoy

When world leaders meet next week in Copenhagen to talk about climate change and the fate of the planet, there will be one big, liquid elephant in the room: water shortage.

The problem could be as big as global warming: If the world doesn’t change the way it uses water, humanity will face a major shortfall by 2030, McKinsey said in a recent report. That’s a deficit of about 40% less water than what would be needed.

Drought is already ravaging places such as east Africa, with dying crops and cattle and hungry people. California’s water woes aren’t quite as extreme, but shortages have prompted higher prices and rationing.

Unlike worries about possible electricity shortages—which are already wracking policy makers from Capetown to Copenhagen—the specter of water shortages threatens more than just modern conveniences. “You can live without television, without a car, without a bicyle, without extra clothes. You can’t live without water,” says Margaret Catley-Carlson, chair of the World Economics’ Forum Global Agenda Council and a longtime water-conservation advocate.

Yet few policy makers are talking, never mind doing, much about the impending water debacle, the McKinsey report notes…………….

Full Story at http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/12/03/boiling-point-what-to-do-about-looming-water-shortages/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fenvironmentalcapital%2Ffeed+(WSJ.com%3A+Environmental+Capital+-+WSJ.com)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

Energy bills could rise to more than £2,000, says Ofgem

 

UK Peak Energy Demand May Outstrip Supply Capabilities By 2017: Douglas-Westwood

John Westwood, chairman of Douglas-Westwood, said: “The rising amounts of required energy capacity will place considerable pressure on the UK economy, the entire energy supply chain and it is the consumer who will ultimately have to pay the price of indecision.

“Considering successive governments have had 30 years notice of the present serious decline of UK oil & gas supplies and full knowledge of generation plant lifetimes there is no excuse for allowing the development of the pending problem. A balance will need to be struck quickly between energy security, the intermittent nature of renewable energy generation, climate change mitigation targets and potentially volatile public opinion.”

See http://fossilfuel.energy-business-review.com/news/uk_peak_energy_demand_may_outstrip_supply_capabilities_by_2017_douglaswestwood_091202/

 

Energy bills could rise to more than £2,000, says Ofgem

Rowena Mason and Harry Wallop, The Telegraph

Alistair Buchanan, the chief executive of Ofgem, just two months after predicting bills could increase by 60 per cent by 2016, has now admitted he had not been gloomy enough.

Speaking at a House of Commons Energy select committee he said Ofgem had look again at its findings after energy companies told the regulator that it may have underestimated the scale of problems facing the UK.

Bills have already increased by much more than inflation, climbing from below £600 five years ago, and are now – especially for pensioners – many households’ biggest monthly cost.

Ofgem in October warned that rising demand, an increasing reliance on imports from uncertain sources, a lack of storage facilities and the fact Britain had too many ageing coal-fired power stations, would force up bills by between 14 per cent and 60 per cent above inlfation by 2020.
In the worst case scenario, this would inmply bills would increase from the current average of £1,300 for each household to £1,950.
However, Ofgem now believes bills could go considerably higher…
(3 Dec 2009)
The original Ofgem (Office of the Gas and Electricity Markets) report can be accessed here. The Telegraph article concludes with a quote from Mr. Buchanan, “It is absolutely incumbent on us to represent clearly to consumers what it is costing them, so they fully understand what the cost is to make Britain a nicer place to live in for our children and grandchildren.” My emphasis. I leave the reader to draw his own conclusions. -KS

see http://www.energybulletin.net/node/50896

 

Using standby diesel generators for short term reserve

Using standby diesel generators for short term reserve to support main power grids – potentially good news from National Grid

by Claverton Energy Research Group: admin Thursday, November 26th, 2009 Using standby generators for short term reserve. (emails published with permission of authors from Quigg Associates and National Grid)

Charles,

I was delighted to see you last week. The topic I mentioned, using standby generators for short term reserve is one in which I am not currently involved but it does strike me as a useful technique for reducing CO2 emissions. There are a few ‘fleets’ of standby generators arranged to quote the National Grid for this service but the short term nature of the contracts offered are I think a deterrent to the potential which could be exploited. I was involved with the Wessex Water operation which was heading towards 20MW when I left. This, together with some sewage gas generation has now been changed into a separate company. Another successful operation is run by Alastair Martin@flexitricity.com  

Alastair is a contributor to Claverton Energy Group.  He became interested in the short term reserve potential and was one of those who wrote a paper for government which shows that there is a potential saving of 90% in the emissions to provide this service.

His paper is the first on the list at – http://www.flexitricity.com/resources/ As you might guess he trades under the Flexitricity name. However the conclusions in the paper seem sound enough.

When I was with Wessex Water the obstacles to a larger expansion of the technique were:-………………………..

Kind Regards

Bernard Quigg

Quigg Associates

Full story at http://www.claverton-energy.com/using-standby-generators-for-short-term-reserve-potentially-good-news-from-national-grid.html

 

What keeping ahead of the Oil Curve can do for Climate Change

What Peak Oil Can Do for Climate Change

Follow the Yellow Brick Road

By Chris Nelder
Friday, November 20th, 2009

With all eyes focused on the Copenhagen climate summit in less than three weeks, perhaps it’s time for the peakists to find a new purpose.

The reason is simple. Money isn’t interested in problems; it’s only interested in solutions. And wherever capital goes is where the changes will be made.

The public also has little appetite for unpleasant stories, even true ones. The message is: Don’t tell us what we can’t consume — tell us what we can consume. Tell us our grid power costs are going to go up because of climate change and we’ll fight it. But help us buy efficiency improvements and renewables that will pay for themselves in fuel savings, and we’ll support it all the way.

A new Pew study on “apocalypse fatigue” highlights the problem nicely. The public’s confidence in the global warming problem has fallen sharply this year, even as momentum built toward Copenhagen.

Guilt and deprivation simply don’t sell like opportunity does.

That’s why trillions of dollars are pouring into cleantech annually, while the peak oil community continues to go begging for a few dollars to staff a small office and keep a web server running, all while battling a constant onslaught of misinformation placed in the top mainstream media by very deep-pocketed vested interests.

That’s why I said last week that the IEA was shrewd to turn its annual World Energy Outlook into a stalking horse, masquerading its alarm about peak oil as an earnest appeal to address climate change…………………………..

http://www.getreallist.com/what-peak-oil-can-do-for-climate-change.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Getreallist+(GetRealList)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

Researchers develop machine to recycle carbon dioxide

23 Nov 2009:

  Researchers Develop Machine To Recycle Carbon Dioxide Into Fuel

U.S. researchers have demonstrated a technology that uses the sun’s heat to convert carbon dioxide and water into the building blocks of traditional fuels, a reverse combustion process that may emerge as a practical alternative to sequestration of CO2 emissions from power plants. The prototype “Sunshine to Petrol” system, developed by Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico, uses concentrated solar energy to trigger a thermo-chemical reaction in an iron-rich composite located inside a two-sided cylindrical chamber.

The iron oxide is designed to lose an oxygen molecule when exposed to 1,500 degree C heat, and then retrieve an oxygen molecule when it is cooled down, essentially converting an incoming supply of CO2 into an outgoing stream of carbon monoxide. Additionally, when researchers

at Sandia National Laboratories pump water into the chamber rather than CO2, the machine produces hydrogen. Combining those retrieved gases — hydrogen and carbon monoxide — they are able to create syngas, which can be used as a fuel. While researchers say the technology likely will not be ready for market for 15 to 20 years, it could one day become a practical way to recycle CO2. “It’s a productive utilization of CO2 that you might capture from a coal plant, a brewery, and similar concentrated sources,” said James Miller, a Sandia chemical engineer.

See http://e360.yale.edu/content/digest.msp?id=2158&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+YaleEnvironment360+(Yale+Environment+360)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

More reasons to worry about Asia’s Clean-Tech push?

By Keith Johnson

What do you get when mix a group that passionately believes technology holds the answer to our energy future with angst about Asia’s clean-tech irruption? “Rising Tigers, Sleeping Giant,” a new report out today from the technophile Breakthrough Institute that makes the case that the U.S. is losing ground in a hugely important race.

Flickr So cute when they’re little

The idea that the U.S. is falling behind in Asia, and especially China, when it comes to clean tech isn’t new. It keeps Tom Friedman in business, for starters. And it keeps cropping up in congressional hearings in Washington on energy and climate legislation.

The U.S. hasn’t actually fallen too far behind yet. It’s the future that the Breakthrough Institute is worried about. Specifically, the next five years, when China, Japan, and South Korea are expected to spend about $500 billion to directly promote clean-technology development and depolyment, compared with about $170 billion in the U.S.—and that’s including energy legislation that passed the House and shoaled in the Senate…………………

…………………..At the end of the day, all the worries about the clean-tech race boil down to a much broader question: Does America’s energy and economic future depend on retooling its ailing manufacturing sector, or does the future of manufacturing depend on retooling energy policy?

Full story at http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/11/18/flying-tigers-more-reasons-to-worry-about-asias-clean-tech-push/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wsj%2Fenvironmentalcapital%2Ffeed+(WSJ.com%3A+Environmental+Capital+-+WSJ.com)&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

 

Colin Campbell’s response to the Guardian IEA reporting

Leading energy analyst Colin Campbell has just published a response to the Peak Oil debate now raging

Colin Campbell’s Response to the Guardian IEA Reporting

Last week saw the release of the IEAs 2009 World Economic Outlook on which we will be providing some analysis in the coming weeks. The night before its release, the Guardian ran an interview with a ‘whistleblower’ claiming that key oil figures were distorted by US pressure so as to avoid ‘panic buying’, claims the IEA subsequently denied. Today, we see the fourth Guardian article in a week on the urgency of Peak Oil…………………

…………………….It is more difficult to evaluate the Non-Conventional oils, comprising tarsands and heavy oils, deepwater oil, Polar oil and Natural Gas Liquids, but the above graph suggests that the peak of all categories was passed in 2008. A debate rages as to the precise date of overall peak but rather misses the point when what matters is the vision of long decline on the other side of it.

Given the central role of oil in the modern economy, the peak of production promises to be a turning point of historical magnitude. It seems that banks have been lending more than they had on deposit, confident that Tomorrow’s Economic Growth was collateral for Today’s Debt, without recognising that the expansion was fuelled by cheap oil-based energy. The Governments are now printing yet more money under Keynesian principles in the hope of restoring past prosperity, which may meet with a brief success. But if it does, it would stimulate the demand for oil that would again soon breach the supply limits, leading to another price shock and an even worse consequent economic depression. In fact, today 28 billion barrels a year support a world population on 6.7 billion people, but by 2050 the supply will have fallen to a level able to support less than half that number in their present way of life.

There is a great deal that can be done to reduce waste and bring in renewable energies. Coal and nuclear power can also ease the transition although they are themselves also subject to depletion. The challenges are however great, and it is clear that governments must move urgently to prepare for what unfolds. In parallel come the challenges of climate change that are to a degree related to oil supply.

There may well now be a certain awakening, and the OECD governments may begin to seek an umbrella under which to introduce new national policies. This may in turn allow the IEA to come forward with more realistic assessments of the true situation. The media too has an important role to alert people at large of what unfolds. It underlines the value of the article you have published for which you deserve every credit.

Enough said!

Yours sincerely,

C.J.Campbell

Complete letter at http://www.theoildrum.com/node/5970