Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

joefizz

Martyn1981 said:

joefizz said:

Martyn1981 said:

I simply assumed that you (like all the rest of us) knew that there were many, many different forms of storage that we could mix and match. On here we've been discussing them for getting on 10yrs.
But good on you for finally catching up. 

I am going to be cruel and say, yes you may have been discussing them but some of us have been working on them for longer.
As for catching up, Im afraid Martyn, again Im going to be cruel and say that instead of making a cheap and ineffective point you could have just asked what I actually knew about it and I would have been glad to give some information.
No doubt someone will make a youtube video about it in a couple of years and you can repost it on here.

Loads of vids about Highview, I've been watching them with great interest for many years, and of course the informative vids they themselves have produced and run on their site to give simple explanations of the idea and their expansion plans, which seem to be going great both here and in the US.

Hopefully this form of storage, like so, so many others that we've been chatting about for so, so many years, will be successful.

Again Im labouring the point Martyn but I said something similar (compressed air rather than liquified). So no, you havent been talking about my NDA stuff for 10 years, but thats hardly surprising since it was only prototyped about 3 years ago. Its a different approach to the underground and the stuff by Seamus Garvey whjch is more large scale.

As I said, you wouldnt find it out on google but you will in a couple of years.
The compressed air side could be really revolutionary because it utilised technology weve been using for a century or more. (I used a version of it on Sunday when I charged up both the compressors in the garage when the sun was actually shining and used them yesterday on the car). With my purchase of a 3d printer I could replicate the prototype in my garage.
Its inefficient (the bit I was interested in) but its readily available, expandable and can be manufacturer even on site or any decent engineering works in the country. We can pretty much implement the inefficient versions right now at very little cost and work on efficiencies later (or not if RE excess is sufficient).
As with the BEV discussion, it does away with importing a lot of stuff and can be made locally with little residual toxicity.
Its now all going to be in the mix for green deal funding.

michaels

joefizz said:

Martyn1981 said:

joefizz said:

Martyn1981 said:

I simply assumed that you (like all the rest of us) knew that there were many, many different forms of storage that we could mix and match. On here we've been discussing them for getting on 10yrs.
But good on you for finally catching up. 

I am going to be cruel and say, yes you may have been discussing them but some of us have been working on them for longer.
As for catching up, Im afraid Martyn, again Im going to be cruel and say that instead of making a cheap and ineffective point you could have just asked what I actually knew about it and I would have been glad to give some information.
No doubt someone will make a youtube video about it in a couple of years and you can repost it on here.

Loads of vids about Highview, I've been watching them with great interest for many years, and of course the informative vids they themselves have produced and run on their site to give simple explanations of the idea and their expansion plans, which seem to be going great both here and in the US.

Hopefully this form of storage, like so, so many others that we've been chatting about for so, so many years, will be successful.

Again Im labouring the point Martyn but I said something similar (compressed air rather than liquified). So no, you havent been talking about my NDA stuff for 10 years, but thats hardly surprising since it was only prototyped about 3 years ago. Its a different approach to the underground and the stuff by Seamus Garvey whjch is more large scale.

As I said, you wouldnt find it out on google but you will in a couple of years.
The compressed air side could be really revolutionary because it utilised technology weve been using for a century or more. (I used a version of it on Sunday when I charged up both the compressors in the garage when the sun was actually shining and used them yesterday on the car). With my purchase of a 3d printer I could replicate the prototype in my garage.
Its inefficient (the bit I was interested in) but its readily available, expandable and can be manufacturer even on site or any decent engineering works in the country. We can pretty much implement the inefficient versions right now at very little cost and work on efficiencies later (or not if RE excess is sufficient).
As with the BEV discussion, it does away with importing a lot of stuff and can be made locally with little residual toxicity.
Its now all going to be in the mix for green deal funding.

Interesting.  I remember a couple of years ago PSA suggested they would use compressed air storage to capture energy from regen breaking to produce a vehicle that was as efficient as the toyota mild hybrid tech without going down the route of a second electric motor and battery - I'm not sure if it ever saw the light of day?

Found a link:
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/how-peugeot-citroen-s-hybrid-air-system-explained-the-car-that-runs-on-air-57554.html

And why (Peugeot say) it didn't go ahead:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/peugeot-blames-politicians-death-hybrid-air

Martyn1981

joefizz said:

Martyn1981 said:

joefizz said:

Martyn1981 said:

I simply assumed that you (like all the rest of us) knew that there were many, many different forms of storage that we could mix and match. On here we've been discussing them for getting on 10yrs.
But good on you for finally catching up. 

I am going to be cruel and say, yes you may have been discussing them but some of us have been working on them for longer.
As for catching up, Im afraid Martyn, again Im going to be cruel and say that instead of making a cheap and ineffective point you could have just asked what I actually knew about it and I would have been glad to give some information.
No doubt someone will make a youtube video about it in a couple of years and you can repost it on here.

Loads of vids about Highview, I've been watching them with great interest for many years, and of course the informative vids they themselves have produced and run on their site to give simple explanations of the idea and their expansion plans, which seem to be going great both here and in the US.

Hopefully this form of storage, like so, so many others that we've been chatting about for so, so many years, will be successful.

Again Im labouring the point Martyn but I said something similar (compressed air rather than liquified). So no, you havent been talking about my NDA stuff for 10 years, but thats hardly surprising since it was only prototyped about 3 years ago. Its a different approach to the underground and the stuff by Seamus Garvey whjch is more large scale.

As I said, you wouldnt find it out on google but you will in a couple of years.
The compressed air side could be really revolutionary because it utilised technology weve been using for a century or more. (I used a version of it on Sunday when I charged up both the compressors in the garage when the sun was actually shining and used them yesterday on the car). With my purchase of a 3d printer I could replicate the prototype in my garage.
Its inefficient (the bit I was interested in) but its readily available, expandable and can be manufacturer even on site or any decent engineering works in the country. We can pretty much implement the inefficient versions right now at very little cost and work on efficiencies later (or not if RE excess is sufficient).
As with the BEV discussion, it does away with importing a lot of stuff and can be made locally with little residual toxicity.
Its now all going to be in the mix for green deal funding.

Hiya, we've been chatting about CAES for even longer than LAES. Loads of vids on it on Youtube too, stretching back most of a decade, from using caverns, undersea airbags, old mines and so on. Really interesting stuff, so the more versions of this form of storage (one of many, many forms of storage we've been chatting about for years) that exist the better. Hope it goes well.

PS. Sorry you didn't find that old post amusing, I just thought it would be funny to reply in kind to you.

zeupater

michaels said:

Interesting.  I remember a couple of years ago PSA suggested they would use compressed air storage to capture energy from regen breaking to produce a vehicle that was as efficient as the toyota mild hybrid tech without going down the route of a second electric motor and battery - I'm not sure if it ever saw the light of day?

Found a link:
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/how-peugeot-citroen-s-hybrid-air-system-explained-the-car-that-runs-on-air-57554.html

And why (Peugeot say) it didn't go ahead:
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/peugeot-blames-politicians-death-hybrid-air

Hi

I wouldn't really look to the elected politicians on that one, moreso the way the bureaucracy relies on & reacts to high level industry lobbying on behalf of various concerned sectors & how this influences data & reasoning laid before the politicians for discussion (if any!) .... you may find that there was a reason behind many decisions which made it through into legislation - for example, the disconnect between catalytic converter & lean burn engine technology and the effect of legislation ... both may have offered similar emission outcomes in isolation, but can't work together ... fun proposition - guess which multinationals were lobbying for what became favoured solution for EU legislation?? ...

HTH - Z

Martyn1981

Articles looking at what the Committee on Climate Change is suggesting we do.

CCC calls on UK to ‘seize the day’ on green revolution

The UK Committee on Climate Change has called on government ministers to “seize the opportunity” to turn the COVID-19 crisis into a defining moment for the green transformation of society.

The powerful committee made the call as it published new advice in an annual report to parliament on a range of sectors to accelerate the transition to a net-zero emissions economy by 2040.

Road to net zero: what the Committee on Climate Change recommends

The government’s statutory adviser, the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), publishes its progress report on Thursday on efforts to cut emissions. This is what it says needs to happen urgently if the UK is to reach its target of hitting net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Martyn1981

Here's a great article as it revolves around a change to 'the question'. Rather than theorize about 100% clean leccy, with all the problems and caveats that raises, why not look to 90% ...... and then worry about the last 10%. Then the answer gets easier:

USA Could Hit 90% Clean Electricity By 2035

Experts disagree about how fast the United States can replace coal and gas-fired power plants with zero-carbon electricity. Some say we can shift to 100 percent clean power by 2050 with little friction and minimal cost. Others say that’s unrealistically optimistic. Scientists on both sides of the argument agree that it’s possible to get to 80 or 90 percent clean power. The debate centers on that last 10 or 20 percent.

Researchers tried to get around this sticking point in a new analysis from UC Berkeley. Instead of asking, “how much?” they asked “how fast?” — specifically, how fast we could get to 90 percent zero-carbon power — meaning wind, solar, hydropower and nuclear power — at no extra cost to consumers. Thanks to rapidly falling costs for wind turbines, solar panels and batteries, the answer is 2035.

[My bold.]

Martyn1981

Some big RE figures for the UK for Q1.

Renewable energy breaks UK record in first quarter of 2020

Renewable energy made up almost half of Britain’s electricity generation in the first three months of the year, with a surge in wind power helping to set a new record for clean energy.

The government’s official data has revealed that renewable energy made up 47% of the UK’s electricity generation in the first three months of the year, smashing the previous quarterly record of 39% set last year.

Martyn1981

Another attempt to make Big Oil pay up for the deceptive practices they used to downplay (or deny) AGW. I've no idea if (or when) one of these cases will succeed, it took a lot of attempts and many years to win against Big Tobacco. Perhaps the lesson learned from that, that the industry will be broken, actually works against these cases:

Minnesota Sues ExxonMobil, Koch Industries, & American Petroleum Institute

The State of Minnesota has joined the scrum of state and local governments seeking to hold the oil industry responsible for a host of behaviors that have harmed their communities and the people who live there. To date, none of those suits has been successful. Will the Minnesota suit be any different? Perhaps.

Unlike other climate change lawsuits, this one was filed in state court and alleges violations of state laws pertaining to consumer fraud, deceptive trade practices, and false advertising. In the complaint, Minnesota attorney general Keith Ellison says the companies devised plans to deceive the public about climate change science in order to safeguard their enormously profitable industry. In so doing, they “have harmed Minnesotans’ health and our state’s environment, infrastructure, and economy.”

The named defendants are ExxonMobil, three entities that are part of Koch Industries, and the American Petroleum Institute. The complaint seeks restitution for the harm done by the defendants’ nefarious actions, a restraining order barring them from continuing to lie about their activities, and money to pay for a public education campaign on climate change.

“The State seeks to ensure that the parties who have profited from avoiding the consequences and costs of dealing with global warming and its physical, environmental, social, and economic consequences, bear the costs of those impacts, rather than Minnesota taxpayers, residents, or broader segments of the public,” the lawsuit says.

ed110220

Martyn1981 said:

Doesn't seem very long ago that we were talking about the possibility of double digit MW wind turbines, and now they are already being negotiated for deployment:

Siemens Gamesa bags contract to supply giant turbines to UK wind farm

Developer Innogy confirmed yesterday that it had signed a preferred supplier agreement with the turbine maker for 100 of its new 14MW offshore turbines, which are 262 metres tall, or just 47 metres shorter than The Shard.

And talking digits, we also see the opposite effect, with a 1.4GW wind farm, only just sneaking into triple digits for the WT's.

Wow, 14 MW, that's massive! What makes it even more impressive is that the previous largest turbine (GE Haliade-X 12 MW) hasn't even entered commercial production yet, so the pace of increase is quick.
One thing I don't really understand is that the new turbine has a rotor diameter that is only barely larger than the Haliade-X at 222 metres, but is considerably more powerful. Maybe it has a higher tower to access higher wind speeds?

Martyn1981

ed110220 said:

Martyn1981 said:

Doesn't seem very long ago that we were talking about the possibility of double digit MW wind turbines, and now they are already being negotiated for deployment:

Siemens Gamesa bags contract to supply giant turbines to UK wind farm

Developer Innogy confirmed yesterday that it had signed a preferred supplier agreement with the turbine maker for 100 of its new 14MW offshore turbines, which are 262 metres tall, or just 47 metres shorter than The Shard.

And talking digits, we also see the opposite effect, with a 1.4GW wind farm, only just sneaking into triple digits for the WT's.

Wow, 14 MW, that's massive! What makes it even more impressive is that the previous largest turbine (GE Haliade-X 12 MW) hasn't even entered commercial production yet, so the pace of increase is quick.
One thing I don't really understand is that the new turbine has a rotor diameter that is only barely larger than the Haliade-X at 222 metres, but is considerably more powerful. Maybe it has a higher tower to access higher wind speeds?

That's a good question. I don't know much about it, but you can change the power figure from WT's by changing the generator that's installed. So if you know you will have lots of high strength wind, then you may go for a more powerful generator (that's harder to turn), or alternatively, go with a smaller generator for lower wind speeds, when you might not have been able to generate.

I think this is one of the ways that the capacity factor of wind can be 'tuned' for the location. If you want a higher cf, then installing a lower power WT (but it's just as big) will mean it spins more easily, so, made up example:
an 11MW WT generating 48,180MWh pa, has a cf of 50%, but change the power unit to 10MW (so it effectively caps out at 10MW but turns more easily) and generate a bit less 47,304MWh pa, and it has a cf of 54%.

You might want to trade/balance consistency v's annual maximum generation. The same would apply to small off-grid WT's at a domestic level, where you might want a big brute that can cope with constant high winds at one location (but be too hard to turn at low levels), whilst someone in an area with loads of light breezes, and only occasional high winds, would want a lighter model that spins more easily.