Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Martyn1981

Interesting to see a potential revision of the way FF gas is treated in the UK. This article talks about fracking, but I think the real issue here is all FF gas.

The UK has been classing gas as 'low carbon', but that's only when compared to coal. As coal goes, and gas is higher CO2 than our medium/long term targets will allow, legal challenges are looking at changing the government classification.

High court rules government's fracking guidelines 'unlawful'

Natural gas should not be considered a low-carbon fuel, as the government had tried to claim, added Jonathan Marshall, head of analysis at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit. “With the UK’s electricity system almost free of coal, natural gas is now effectively the most carbon-intensive major source of power,” he said. “Official advice from the Committee on Climate Change concluded that fracking was only compatible with national decarbonisation targets if the gas produced replaced higher carbon sources of energy.”

He also pointed to a recent study by the British Geological Survey that found elevated levels of methane near a fracking site, which he said showed the fracking industry was not living up to the standards we should expect.

Martyn1981

:T:T:T

Government throws its weight behind offshore wind power expansion

The government will throw its weight behind an expansion in the use of offshore wind power in the hope the renewable energy source will provide a third of the UK’s electricity by 2030.

Edit - I think they mean leccy, not energy:

Reaching a target of more than 30% of electricity coming from offshore wind would also mean that 70% of Britain’s energy would be from renewable sources by the end of the period.

But, this is still excellent news as it suggests that the RE rollout remains at the approx 3%pa we've seen the last decade, and taking us from around 33% in 2018.

Apologies, but I have to throw in some nuclear comparisons and realisms - we are talking about taking RE leccy from around 5% to 70%, with generation throughout that time period displacing CO2e, whilst HPC may come on line towards the end of that timeline and produce approx 7% of our leccy, and at prices nearly twice the RE contracts now being issued. Going back to mmmmikey's post - What a change we've seen this last decade.

Coastalwatch

Martyn1981 wrote: »

That was interesting, certainly an eye-opener as you point out.

Sadly micro-wind in urban areas is still largely useless. Not being nasty, just realistic, as I'd love a small WT, and I think most of us (PV'ers or not) can see how this would improve variable generation issues.

But, some good news. Prof Mackay says it takes 40kWh to drive 50km's, which is fair based on the primary energy in petrol. But with BEV's we are seeing around 6-7km/kWh, so that 40kWh of petrol can be reduced to around 8kWh of leccy.RE.

Yes, I'd love a WT as well, so thanks both for posting. I followed the link to Ethical mans blog and using the figures he'd posted from a potential supplier(now out of business) I came to a similar conclusion, even for us here on the windy east coast.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ethicalman/2009/12/why_micro_wind_turbines_dont.html
Using an average windspeed of 13 knots from stats gleaned a mile down the road then I might achieve around 0.12 kW/h. Just enough to cover base load perhaps, so would be useful for overnight supply. Presumably the reason few if any have been installed is the cost of installation against expected returns. In the case above annual output could be around 1050 kWh's which at say £0.13 each sees a return of £136! I've no idea what costs may have been involved in the manufacture and installation of one but doubt I should ever live to see an ROI if ever I chose to go down that route. Guess that's why we are also keen on a cost effective home storage package!

Interesting too, the topic of kWh's/ mile when driving. We tend to return around 4m/kWh but on our return journey of some 220 miles last weekend it did record 4.5. Mind you that was with gusty tail wind. Winter driving is less efficient perhaps around 3m/kWh!

Martyn1981

Coastalwatch wrote: »

Presumably the reason few if any have been installed is the cost of installation against expected returns.

Yes(ish). The of-gridders on Navitron mostly had wind, now wind and PV. The problems with small wind are basically down to turbulence, and the need to have a clear run of about 100m+ between your WT and the direction the wind normally comes from, as it takes that long (or that far) for turbulence to settle back down from objects like trees and hedges, and for us, buildings.

So the small WT's spend most of their time 'hunting' as they try to turn into the wind, which itself keeps changing due to buildings and rooftop turbulence as the wind rushes over ridges.

Ideally you need the WT, even a very small one, mounted about 10m+ off the ground, which can cause planning issues.

Then they need love, care and attention, whereas PV is pretty much maintenance free.

Articles often pop up showing designs, usually VAWTS (vertical axis wind turbines, where the blades spin around a vertical (not horizontal) shaft) that generate regardless of turbulence, but they never seem to advance past the early marketing and requests for investments - but you never know?

Personal thought, I wonder what happens to an on-grid WT if there's a power cut? Off-gridders have the problem of too much generation at times, and need to brake a WT in advance of a storm, or switch on dump loads like radiators, immersion heaters in barrels of water etc etc to consume excess and protect batteries from getting fried. Now PV inverters can shut down, but if a WT's blades are spinning then you've got leccy, and without the resistance of the grid, or batts, won't the domestic WT then provide unwanted leccy to the grid, or with resistance removed, go into over-spin and destroy itself?

But ...................... I'd still like one!

Martyn1981

Martyn1981 wrote: »

But by 2012+ 250Wp panels were the norm for rooftop installs, and those are around 15% efficient, and now the norm is probably 280-300Wp, or around 17-18% efficient. And whilst they cost more, we already have higher figures for 'normal' efficiency panels of 330Wp+ (20%).

Happy coincidence - but 400W+ domestic PV panels are talked about in this article, and the Maxeon3 400Wp is already available, though I don't know if this is classed as normal, or high efficiency PV, but either way, not bad.

Martyn1981

Quick waffle - grid based, or grid scale storage is currently very small, but that makes sense as very little is currently needed (RE and therefore RE excess is still relatively small), but we will need to roll out an awful lot in the medium/long term.

So, nice to see that predictions are for a non-linear rollout, which is already accelerating fast.

Wood Mackenzie Sees Utility Scale Battery Storage Doubling In 2019 & Tripling In 2020

Martyn1981

'He's' at it again, undermining US policies on the environment and renewables, but I suspect he's gone too far and created a backlash strong enough to make talking about AGW politically safe(r). Before, even environmentally minded Democrats were nervous about talking about AGW as it was seen as an issue that would split voters.

Trump Escalates War On Renewables, Slashes DOE Budget By 70%

GreatApe

Martyn1981 wrote: »

That was interesting, certainly an eye-opener as you point out.

Sadly micro-wind in urban areas is still largely useless. Not being nasty, just realistic, as I'd love a small WT, and I think most of us (PV'ers or not) can see how this would improve variable generation issues.

But, some good news. Prof Mackay says it takes 40kWh to drive 50km's, which is fair based on the primary energy in petrol. But with BEV's we are seeing around 6-7km/kWh, so that 40kWh of petrol can be reduced to around 8kWh of leccy.

Also he seems a little critical of wind potential, but since then we've seen the massive growth in ...... well ...... massive wind turbines, which are more efficient (higher capacity factors) and getting cheaper, almost cheap, now. In fact the UK could meet ten to one hundred times our future and higher leccy needs from UK off-shore waters:

The UK is the Saudi Arabia of wind energy

quite a different story to the article statement - "It leads to a dispiriting conclusion. Wind is, at best, only a very partial solution to the problem of how to generate low-carbon energy."


But my main criticism of Prof Mackay is reserved for his PV comments in his oft quoted (usually by nuclear fans) report 'Without Hot Air." He is extremely critical of PV in the UK, justifying his position with this statement:



That's a very bold statement, that I've boldened!

In the chapter you'll find that he (correctly for the time) refers to high efficiency PV as being approx 20% efficient, and 'typical', 'cheap' & 'rooftop' PV as being approx 10% efficient.

But by 2012+ 250Wp panels were the norm for rooftop installs, and those are around 15% efficient, and now the norm is probably 280-300Wp, or around 17-18% efficient. And whilst they cost more, we already have higher figures for 'normal' efficiency panels of 330Wp+ (20%).

So the 'expert' drew a line in the sand regarding efficiencies, claiming "no significant revision", but we are already seeing efficiencies 100% higher than he was using. And whilst Perovskite PV was not yet possible when he wrote his book, combined Silicon/Perovskite is already hitting high 20%'s and expected to push into high 30%'s for PV panels that when commercialised will be a similar cost/Wp as 'normal' PV, so 3 to 4 times Prof MacKay's line in the sand.


Sorry for the diatribe, and attacks on the late Professor, but technology (and falling costs) have improved far more than anyone seems to have expected or even hoped for. We shouldn't get too excited too soon, but reality looks like delivering ever better RE.

Offshore wind is a success and possible thanks to CCGTs but do not downplay how effective nuclear is or could have been.

The French more or less solved their energy (not just electricity) needs before 2000 their fleet could output as much as 500TWh + 70TWh hydro means they more or less solved Electricity 300TWh BEVs 150TWh & Heating 120TWh

How long will it take the UK to go towards 500TWh from solar/wind combo? 2050-2060 maybe longer? So 50-60-70 years later than the French

The french did well the other EU nations and the USA should have done the same and the world could have had 50-60 years more clean power. Now the future is wind power deployed over a 40-60 year period slow and steady will wind the race

Martyn1981

Martyn1981 wrote: »

So the 'expert' drew a line in the sand regarding efficiencies, claiming "no significant revision", but we are already seeing efficiencies 100% higher than he was using. And whilst Perovskite PV was not yet possible when he wrote his book, combined Silicon/Perovskite is already hitting high 20%'s and expected to push into high 30%'s for PV panels that when commercialised will be a similar cost/Wp as 'normal' PV, so 3 to 4 times Prof MacKay's line in the sand.

Silicon Perovskite PV now above 30% (lab conditions) and hopes of 35% in 3-5yrs.

Note - these figures are based on bi-facial panels, so figures apply to ground mount / flat surface mounted PV, whilst roof mounted (no light 'access' to the back) would be 20% less (20% of 30.2% that is).

Netherlands’ ECN achieves 30.2% efficiency for bifacial tandem cell based on perovskite

The cell was created by applying a newly developed perovskite cell on top of an industrial bifacial crystalline silicon version. The resulting cell is said to better harvest sunlight, as one unit is optimized for high energy photons and the other absorbs low energy particles.

Coastalwatch

Coupled withOil company's seemingly divesting vast sums of capital in renewable energy. Insurers could well begin to invest heavily as well should the link below eventually come to fruition!


Britain’s insurers could unlock ‘billions of pounds’ of investments for clean energy projects


http://go.pardot.com/e/83602/ounds-of-investments-for-clean/d5qx71/439248160?h=ZJIMX4CAeObhTJE26vz2XfYp9-MjL_65wkLt9ZNow5Y