Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

zeupater

Martyn1981 wrote: »

I'm only guessing here, but perhaps the carbon targets are getting revised not due to the intention of investing more money, but simply because of what's already happened/happening. More bang for your buck.

RE rollout costs have fallen faster than expected, storage costs have fallen faster, public support (and demand side investment) has been good, and EV popularity/take up is growing faster than expected. Plus of course all the doom-saying about integrating RE onto the grid has proven false with ever higher targets looking acceptable before we need to worry about storage etc.

I think back to all the discussions we had with the nay-sayers on here 5 or 6 yrs ago, and I'd have loved to have suggested £64/MWh off-shore wind contracts, and EV waiting lists into six figures, but I didn't think we'd be there yet. But I'm not complaining.

Hi

Yes, I appreciate that costs are falling and that much of what is done is achieved by regulation & not EU expenditure ... however, the latest announcements suggest that the budget allocated to reducing climatic impact is to be increased by 25% and it already forms a considerable proportion of total expenditure .... what I was attempting to convey is that the sums don't add up in any way unless the budget is based on the UK not only continuing to pay current levels of contribution for the period 2021-27 but increasing that contribution by around 14% in line with the remaining 27, which is extremely unlikely ....

Considering the above, I'd be minded to take any EU expenditure announcement (or that of any major change) at the moment as little more than an aspiration to be placed before the member nation governments and therefore taken with a 'pinch-of-salt' . One of the major criticisms of the EU (and many national governments) is that they tend to bank any predicted benefits as soon as legislation is passed & regulation permits on the basis that any potential for failure can always be devolved at a later date ....

HTH
Z

Martyn1981

The potential for RE on the grid 'without problems' keeps getting higher and higher, and vastly more than the naysayers like to pretend:

Solar and wind could provide 60% of UK power without jeopardising reliability, study finds

“Wind and solar, storage and demand response are now low-cost technologies, and capable of powering the electricity system in 2030. What is needed now is to ensure that markets deliver these at scale over the next decade,” Alex Kazaglis, head of energy and industry at Vivid, added.

silverwhistle

zeupater wrote: »

EU budget allocated to reducing climatic impact is to be increased by 25% and it already forms a considerable proportion of total expenditure ....

Did you see any more detail than that (to save me doing independent research :-) )? Is the figure for research, direct subvention or what?


In the UK for example the solar FIT is paid by consumers even if administered by government. Surely a lot of what government does (perhaps not in the UK..) is legislating appropriately, eg: housing insulation standards, and there is no direct expenditure from budgets beyond the legislative and administrative burden?


I'm sure there are direct expenditures - for example pump priming EV's by the subsidy and charging points where the commercial suppliers leave gaps (mid-Wales anyone?) but how much are they in the overall scheme of things when there are societal benefits. I can't remember which northern European country it was, but they found a three to one benefit (pollution, health etc.) on money spent on cycling infrastructure.

Martyn1981

Some info on another form of energy storage. From previous items about shipping sunlight (H2) from Australia to Japan, ammonia was mentioned as a more dense and stable form of H2.

Siemens pilots the use of ammonia for green energy storage

A chemical compound commonly used to boost crop yields could be the answer to helping the world increase its consumption of renewable energy.

In a world first, Siemens is opening a £1.5m pilot project in Oxfordshire employing ammonia as a new form of energy storage.

The German industrial firm hopes to prove that ammonia can be as useful as more established storage technologies, such as lithium-ion batteries, when it comes to managing the variable output of wind and solar power.

The proof-of-concept facility at Harwell will turn electricity, water and air into ammonia without releasing carbon emissions. The ammonia is stored in a tank and later either burned to generate electricity, sold as a fuel for vehicles or for industrial purposes, such as refrigeration.

Dr Ian Wilkinson, programme manager for Siemens’ green ammonia demonstrator, said: “Storage is recognised as the enabler for intermittent renewable power.

“This is where we’re different from usual storage, we’re not just looking at power. Usually it’s [storage] just filling in the gaps when the sun’s not shining and the wind is not blowing. We’re looking at other uses, mobility and industrial uses.”

Siemens believes ammonia has an advantage other over emerging storage technologies, such as “liquid air” and flow batteries, because it is repurposing existing technology and hardware.

zeupater

silverwhistle wrote: »

Did you see any more detail than that (to save me doing independent research :-) )? Is the figure for research, direct subvention or what?

In the UK for example the solar FIT is paid by consumers even if administered by government. Surely a lot of what government does (perhaps not in the UK..) is legislating appropriately, eg: housing insulation standards, and there is no direct expenditure from budgets beyond the legislative and administrative burden? ...

Hi

I thought of that (thinking of smart-meters etc) and looked into the announcements to check whether the headline figures were based on direct EU expenditure or through regulation & it's definitely direct expenditure because they're seeking to raise income levels from the member states to fund it ...

If the EU is already becoming more unpopular through being totally detached from national governments & effectively not engaging the vast majority of citizens, this isn't really the way to improve the situation ....

HTH
Z

Martyn1981

New report shows UK’s wind and marine energy companies exporting to 44 countries

RenewableUK has published a report which demonstrates the global success of UK-based companies working in the onshore and offshore wind, wave and tidal energy industries.

The new study, Export Nation, shows that an illustrative sample of 43 British companies exported goods and services to 44 countries in 2017. These companies struck 445 deals to work on 434 wind, wave and tidal energy projects all over the world – throughout the rest of Europe, North and South America, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, Australia and Antarctica.

The contracts were worth up to £7.5 million each, with some companies earning £20 million overall from their wind and marine energy exports last year. They range from exporting small onshore wind turbines to providing 80-metre blades and cables for offshore wind farms. Exporting our expertise is also important, providing consultants to develop wind, wave and tidal energy projects worldwide.

silverwhistle

Thanks Z. As you say, if it is direct expenditure it's not good if the exact detail isn't transparent.



Still sadder is that I still trust them more than our own government..

michaels

silverwhistle wrote: »

Thanks Z. As you say, if it is direct expenditure it's not good if the exact detail isn't transparent.



Still sadder is that I still trust them more than our own government..

Presumably the subsidy helps pay for the overpriced solar panels resulting from the import tariffs designed to protect a few hundred German jobs at the expense of 400m Europeans - luckily European 'democracy' prevents a powerful producers group from rent seeking at the expense of everyone else - not

zeupater

michaels wrote: »

Presumably the subsidy helps pay for the overpriced solar panels resulting from the import tariffs designed to protect a few hundred German jobs at the expense of 400m Europeans - luckily European 'democracy' prevents a powerful producers group from rent seeking at the expense of everyone else - not

Hi

... Looking at where the money usually goes, my guess is that the EU will look us the increased budget to help fund the development of renewable energy, clean air & environmental schemes similar to the way they do on regional development (including totally unnecessary prominent & expensive signage!), effectively providing a conduit to move capital and business towards the lower cost economies to help keep Europe openly competitive in global market sectors where competition is possible & employing protectionism practices where competition is virtually impossible ....

I doubt that the EU itself will look to provide serious funding directly to schemes which benefit citizens/consumers, such as home batteries, IoT, EVs etc, because they don't have a treaty mandate to do so, although they certainly have a habit of ensuring that this type of 'interference' is achieved by regulation (eg smart-metering) and thereby devolving (by mandate) funding responsibly to national levels or industries & thereby by implication, us, the consumers ....

It's all fun when you start to understand the process ... :(

HTH
Z

Martyn1981

This article is so, so depressing, as UK tidal potentially gets abandoned (just like PV and on-shore wind) just short of the finishing line.

‘Huge mistake’: Britain throwing away lead in tidal energy, say developers