Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

JKenH

Nil nisi bonum dei mortuis

as we were taught at school.

1961Nick

JKenH wrote: »

Nil nisi bonus dei mortuis

as we were taught at school.

Perhaps this is appropriate for this individual.....

"Acclinis falsis animus meliora recusat"

Bonum est faciet

Martyn1981

Growing activism in the US on the issue of AGW.

As I've said before, I believe that the US's size, influence, CO2 emissions per capita etc etc, means that if their government 'breaks' then the impact on the World as a whole will be massive, as many virtual dominoes will fall.

Climate activists plan Washington DC protest to 'disrupt workings of power'

Climate activists will escalate their protests next month in Washington DC, seeking to shut down traffic with blockades at key intersections to bring attention to the intensifying crisis.

Several local groups are planning the action for 23 September, as youth leaders call for a global strike and a week of action. Hundreds of events are planned, with more than 100 of them in the US, organizers said.

Patrick Young, a 35-year-old who works with the group Rising Tide called the protest “a big ambitious plan to disrupt business as usual”.

“The level of frustration with the inaction of political leaders and corporations on the climate crisis is just really boiling over,” Young said.

Martyn1981

Couple of articles that mesh together quite well:

Justin Welby: investors must pressure firms to act on climate crisis

The archbishop of Canterbury has criticised the investment industry for inaction over the climate crisis and called on fund managers to push companies to reduce their impact on the environment.

Justin Welby said fund managers had “not sufficiently stepped up to the plate” to use their ownership of companies to press for change. He said investors should tell firms to help meet targets set by the Paris climate agreement.

Welby said: “The situation we find ourselves in has rightly been called a climate emergency. We know it’s unquestionable that investors acting together can influence outcomes on everything, including climate change.

[Note - this isn't so much about energy companies nor divestment, it's about influencing the energy consumption of all large companies.]


And speaking of which:

This New York Agency Cut Its Energy Usage By 40%, & So Can You

Jodi Smits Anderson of the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York tells Yale Climate Connections that a change in strategy at the agency’s headquarters made a very significant change in energy usage. “The building used to be 73 degrees day-in, day-out, and the systems were always trying to get us to exactly 73 degrees no matter what Mother Nature was doing outside,” she says.

But now the temperature is allowed to go as low as 68 degrees F in winter and up to 78 degrees F in the summer. That required the people who work in the building to amend their lifestyles. “We also changed our dress codes, telling people that they are responsible to some extent for their own comfort within that range,” Anderson says. “Wear summer clothes in the summer, and wear your grandma’s winter sweater in the winter. Enjoy that.” As a result of the new policy, the agency reduced its energy usage by 40%.

And pocketing 40% savings on your energy bills can be pretty nice as well.

Win, win?

GreatApe

JKenH wrote: »

Interesting article in today’s Daily Telegraph. Extracts below and link to full article at bottom of post.

British start-up Highview beats world to Holy Grail of cheap energy storage for wind and solar

The curse of intermittency for wind and solar power may be conquered sooner than almost anybody thought possible. A beautifully-simple technology from a British start-up has slashed costs to levels that drastically alter the calculus of long-term energy storage.

Highview Power is pioneering the use of "cryogenic" liquid air to store electricity for long enough periods to cover the lulls in renewable energy.

It appears close to doing so at levelized costs that will undercut competition from fossil fuel plants once scale is reached. Highview will almost certainly be the biggest company of its kind in the world by the early 2020s.


Highview cools air to minus 196 degrees centigrade relying on the standard process used for the chemical industry for liquefied natural gas. It mostly uses off-the-shelf kit.

As the air turns into liquid the volume is compressed 700-fold. This concentrate is then stored in insulated steel towers at low pressure. The liquid re-expands with a blast of force when heated and drives a turbine. Bingo: clean, dispatchable power on demand.

The beauty is that it can be scaled-up to provide unlimited storage at diminishing extra cost. “We’re like a hydro plant in a box. We can cover times when the wind doesn’t blow. One to two weeks is totally doable, even a month,” said Mr Cavada.

“The storage tanks are the cheapest component. It is the turbine that costs money. We can double the MWh for 30pc extra investment. As we get bigger the ratios change exponentially,” he said. The efficiency loss or "boil off" rate from the storage vats is just 0.1pc each day. Much of this loss is recaptured by the closed system.

Tumbling costs

Last month the company teamed up with the US energy group Tenaska Power to build four vastly-larger "gigawatt-scale" plants in Texas over the next two years, chiefly intended to back up Texan wind power. This is a revealing venture. Highview is competing toe-to-toe with gas "peaker" plants in a region of the world where pipeline gas is almost given away thanks to shale. If the sums work in Texas, they certainly work in Europe.

Mr Cavada said the levelized costs for a one gigawatt (GW) plant comes in “way below” $100 per MWh. This is already cheaper than any other back-up option on the market, fossil or not. “In ten years from now, I can see that being $50.”

These are remarkable figures. Lazard estimates the levelized costs for gas peaker plants at $152-$206, new pumped-hydro at $152-$198, or a lithium-ion equivalent at $285-$581. Lithium batteries are superb for a few hours but the economics are not viable for utility power over long periods.

“Four hours is nothing for us, five is even better, six is fantastic, and at ten we’re making music,” said Mr Cavada. Liquid air is well-suited to overnight back-up for solar farms in sunbelt zones. Highview teamed up with Spain’s TSK in March to develop gigawatt plants in Spain, South Africa, and the Middle East.

In Britain it makes most sense for wind.




https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/08/26/british-start-up-beats-world-holy-grail-cheap-energy-storage/

It's an interesting idea but the price point of $50/MWh in ten years time is far too high

In the USA wholesale prices vary but it's closer to $30/MWh with the marginal generator typically being gas fired.

That's both for power and 'storage'

So wind plus storage or solar plus storage needs to get towards $30/MWh before any accounting tricks

GreatApe

Marty03576 wrote:

Win, win?

No this is stupid

Being ill just one day thanks to a cold home or office isn't worth it

I thought the whole point of anti fossil fuel cheerleading was that it would make us more healthy and improve lives. Sitting in the cold isn't an acceptable solution. Cold homes isn't a solution

thevilla

You consider 20 deg C (68 f) cold? Hmmm. Don't visit my house.

1961Nick

GreatApe wrote: »

No this is stupid

Being ill just one day thanks to a cold home or office isn't worth it

I thought the whole point of anti fossil fuel cheerleading was that it would make us more healthy and improve lives. Sitting in the cold isn't an acceptable solution. Cold homes isn't a solution

Please don't attribute Mart's post to me when you're 'quoting'.

Martyn1981

GreatApe wrote: »

Win, win?

No this is stupid

Being ill just one day thanks to a cold home or office isn't worth it

I thought the whole point of anti fossil fuel cheerleading was that it would make us more healthy and improve lives. Sitting in the cold isn't an acceptable solution. Cold homes isn't a solution

Then you need to ring them up and tell them that what they are doing is wrong. There's no point telling us on here.

Martyn1981

35 years of offshore wind in 35 seconds