Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

Martyn1981

michaels said:

EVandPV said:

Renewables and "clean" energy well ahead of FF now.

But we are gong to see price spikes if we can't supply demand when renewables are low.  Even with the interconnector issue I think we are still ok for total output but it requires burring lots of (currently) very expensive gas hence the spikes.

Does anyone know how much green hydrogen would cost compared to eh current gas price if it was generated from 'spill' renewables following additonal build out.  I guess we could price the 'input energy' at the CFD price as a worse case (say £50 per mwh) and then assume 0% (no idea guessing) round trip efficiency which would give a price of electricity from green hydrogen of £100 per mwh (plus some percentage for the capital costs, no idea what these would be), similar to nuclear but obviously able to demand follow unlike nuclear and probably available much sooner.  How much is an mwh from gas at current gas prices?

Martyn do you have any real numbers?

Edit:  My back of the envelope numbers with gas at £1.80 per therm and 60% power station efficiency is that current gas cost to generate 1mwh is £10.34

Interesting, I don't have any answers, but can throw in some opinions to support your suggestion.

Firstly, I assume you meant a 50% round trip efficiency, not 0%. That seems reasonable, I think electrolysis can be around 80% efficient, and a hydrogen fuelled CCGT ~60%, so roughly 50% overall, and the £100/MWh you suggest, v's £106/MWh for HPC.

Yes, it surely has added value, since there's an element of storage, which nuclear can't offer, nor demand follow (economically (actually HPC's contract docs state that it won't demand follow)).

Then there's the element of time, RE can be deployed in 1-5yrs (PV through to off-shore wind), whereas HPC may start generating in 2028, 13yrs after contract signing, and 16yrs after the costs/CfD were agreed.

TBH, this isn't a million miles away from what the UK is already doing, which is ramp up RE generation steadily (approx 3.5%pa, over the last decade), steadily displacing FF's, which have fallen from 75%+ to about 40%, and an ever growing amount of spill/waste/curtailment of excess RE generation. As that excess becomes large enough and consistent enough, storage will roll out to make use of it.

So, you're suggesting, roll out RE even faster, but dedicate some of the RE to H2 production, is that right?

I do like that idea, but, and this is a bit pedantic, I'd suggest rolling out more RE too, which will displace more FF's, then let the market, with Gov support and incentives, expand the storage to make use of the increased excess.

Might sound like splitting hairs, but your idea would guarantee the excess RE, which benefits the H2 production and economics by maximising the usage / load factor of the electrolysis equipment, whereas my idea would provide the leccy at cheaper prices, because it's excess, not dedicated generation, but would push up the costs of the storage kit, since it's now operating at a lower load factor. Which is better, I really don't know, but it certainly doesn't matter since the goal* is the same, and really I'm just pondering the best way to get there.

*Or goals - to reduce FF use, and also help to meet peaks in demand, and as economically as possible.


Just a personal opinion on recent events, but I've been reading for at least 20yrs that the UK has a particularly small amount of gas storage v's other European nations. So step one, given that gas is currently needed to demand follow, to allow for RE generation to grow rapidly, we need more gas storage, to help hedge prices. Otherwise, every time gas prices go up, or there's a supply issue, some folk will use it as an excuse to knock RE, or promote expensive nuclear. I wonder if the gas storage can be future proofed so it's located and capable of handling H2 in your scenario?

Martyn1981

Money not energy, but hopefully money that will help generate some clean energy for poorer countries, and so, so importantly now that the climate crisis is upon us, and more importantly them, that funding will help to reduce the chance/amount of FF generation and consumption that might have been deployed.

Climate funding target for poorer countries ‘likely to be met’ by 2022

Developing countries could receive long-promised funds to help them tackle the climate crisis as soon as next year, in a major boost for the prospects of success at the Cop26 climate summit, the climate economist Nicholas Stern has said.

Rich countries pledged in 2009 to provide at least $100bn (£73bn) a year to the developing world by 2020, a target that has been missed. But recent promises of additional cash from the US, the EU and others have lifted the prospects.

“I think that we will probably hit the $100bn for next year,” said Lord Stern, the chair of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at the London School of Economics, in an interview with the Guardian. “We could start to get bilateral flows [from donor countries to poor nations] approaching $50bn to $60bn because if the US came up then others would come up as well. The finance which went to the fossil fuels, which the G7 agreed to phase out quickly, could be reoriented towards renewables.”

gefnew

this may help you martin. 

storage of hydrogen.
Aldbrough | SSE Thermal

Martyn1981

gefnew said:

this may help you martin. 

storage of hydrogen.
Aldbrough | SSE Thermal

Just 320GWh ...... s'pos that's not bad.   ;-)

Cheers.

gefnew

every little helps

Martyn1981

Carbon Commentary newsletter time.

Things I noticed and thought were interesting

Week ending 26th September 2021
 
1, Reducing clothes purchasing. It’s still rare for trade associations to appeal for measures that will shrink the size of their industry. An offshoot of the British Fashion Council did just that last week, saying that the most effective way for the UK fashion industry to reduce its ‘individual and collective detrimental impact on the environment is through reducing consumer demand for new physical clothing’. It points out that fashion is responsible for about 5% of global emissions and calls for the industry to halve the volume of new clothing sold, fulfilling demand with recycled and refashioned clothes. Easier said than done; the careful research contained in the document showed that among ‘intense’ buyers of clothes, 17% would never wear an item again if it had been shown just once on their Instagram feed. 
 
2, Synthetic fuels. Maersk invested in the US startup Prometheus Fuels, now said to be valued at $1.5bn. Prometheus says it will produce liquid hydrocarbons at costs that match fossil fuels within months. The technology is very different to other startups seeking to make fuels using CO2 and hydrogen. It captures both carbon dioxide and water vapour from the air and combines them to make hydrocarbons in a process called aqueous CO2 electrolysis. The entrepreneur has suggested a maximum near-term efficiency of about 60% to the process, suggesting a litre of petrol/gasoline will need about 15 kWh of electricity to make. In low cost solar locations, this will cost no more than 45 US cents, less than a quarter of today’s US wholesale gasoline prices. This is one to watch carefully.
 
3, The price of natural gas. What has caused the unprecedented spike in price? There’s surprisingly little commentary on this and I have not seen any article that notes that climate change is a big part of the reason. Raised levels of demand in Asia are partly due to uncharacteristically high temperatures raising air conditioning needs. This is also the case in the US. Drought in Brazil has meant its large hydroelectric power supplies have been cut to a fraction of normal levels. Brazil and Argentina together are now importing far more gas than China and taking about 1% of world production. (This is an approximate estimate. I couldn’t immediately find reliable data). 
 
4, Electric ferries. In more a symbolic act than a substantial change of policy, Shell said it would buy three 200 seater electric ferries to take employees to its Singapore site. Of more significance, Stena Line signed a contract to put electric ferries on a 3 hour route between Sweden and Denmark. These are big vessels, carrying vehicles and up to 1,500 passengers and the battery size of 60-70 MWH seems to be far larger than any other electric ship on the seas today. Stena indicated that the cost is likely to be about 20% more than conventional equivalents. Recharging time will be about an hour, requiring new powerful electricity connections into the ports.
 
5, Green steel. Two interesting articles in mainstream US publications on decarbonising steel, both focusing on the pioneering companies in Sweden, SSAB and H2 Green Steel. Useful data is spread throughout the writing and for the Wall Street Journal and the New Yorker both to cover the topic in a single week suggests growing awareness of the importance of steel to the global transition. SSAB’S technology head said that he expects green steel to initially cost 20-30% more. That’s before hydrogen prices decline as a result of falling renewables and electrolyser costs. Since a typical American car contains over a tonne of steel, this might add $150-$200 to the cost of a car, assuming metal prices return to usual levels. Will buyers be prepared to pay the relatively small extra price? Another Swedish interviewee seemed confident that the premium will not deter customers, saying that ‘Green steel is becoming a really hot topic in everyday life’ in Sweden. Car manufacturers including Volvo and Mercedes are already committed to buying green steel made using hydrogen.

6, Solar share in Australia. On Friday 24th September rooftop solar provided a 31% share of electricity supply across the main national network just after midday local time. Ground-mounted PV generated a further 12%, with renewables as a whole providing almost 62% of power needs, a new record. (I saw this on RenewEconomy).
 
7, Hydrogen plus renewables. As most of the world struggles with the unprecedented rise in natural gas prices, I wrote an article that assessed how much renewables capacity will be needed to cover the electricity demand of the UK over the course of a year. Using half hour electricity demand and production data for the year to 30th June 2021 provided by Drax Electric Insights, I calculated that to meet all the country's needs  over this period would have required about 4.5 times as much solar and wind power as the UK has today. I assumed that in periods of surplus (about 60% of the time) the unused power would be diverted to electrolysers to make hydrogen. When renewables were insufficient, the H2 would be used in gas turbines to make electricity. The calculations are incomplete but show that the UK would only need to produce about 25% more electricity than today to make up for efficiency losses converting to and from hydrogen. This would be the cheapest way of fully decarbonising the grid. (Thanks to Iain Staffell of Imperial College for providing me with the Drax data. Errors are all mine). 
8, Indoor vertical hydroponics. Growth of indoor agriculture has been rapid and new ‘farms’ are sprouting all over the world. But the range of crops available in shops is still largely limited to green leaves and some berries. This will change. Industry leader AeroFarms announced last week that it would start growing hops, an important ingredient for beers, for the British craft brewer Goose Island in a vertical farm .
 
9, China hydrogen. China currently makes about 25 million tonnes of hydrogen a year, about a third of the world total and probably contributing about 1% of global CO2 emissions. Its Hydrogen Alliance, a body with links to central government, announced a target of 100 GW of electrolysers by 2030. (Today’s installed capacity across the world is less than 1 GW). If operated continuously, they would produce enough hydrogen to match current production, a striking ambition. But, more likely, these electrolysers will be dependent on renewable supply, probably reducing potential H2 production to 50% or less of today’s needs. Nevertheless, this is an ambitious plan that suggests an intention to dominate electrolyser production in the same way that China now largely controls PV panel manufacture. For comparison, Germany aims for just 5 GW by 2030, one twentieth of China’s ambition.
 
10, EV shares in major European countries. In many places new auto sales remain depressed but the share held by EVs is rising increasingly rapidly. In France and the UK, EVs captured just under 20%, representing an almost doubling of market share in a year. In Germany, the number was higher at almost 28% of total sales. The Netherlands reached 30%. Pure battery cars, as opposed to plug-in hybrids, are tending to grow faster and are now selling better than diesels in many countries.   

Martyn1981

I'm not trying to knock Labour here, but they seem to be promising the bleedin obvious - that we need to spend more on the climate crisis now, or we'll just end up spending far more later. Not sure how these issues are political, they are simple science, maths, and economics.

I suppose the other side of the coin is Boris' recent claims that being green is easy, which seems a tad untasteful after they cut so much of the green plans and policies when they won a majority Gov in 2015.

There's a problem, there's a solution, there's a net gain in jobs, and the longer we delay or the slower we go, the greater the cost will be, doesn't seem that complicated to me, but then I'm only a simple soul.

Labour promises to spend £28bn a year on tackling climate crisis

Labour would invest £28bn a year in climate measures to protect Britain from disaster, Rachel Reeves has announced in by far the party’s biggest spending pledge to date.

The amount would quadruple the government’s current capital investment, and Labour said it would hope to attract a matching sum of private investment in green technologies. In total, the party will commit to spending £224bn on climate measures over the next eight years.

Targets for spending would include gigafactories to build batteries for electric vehicles, the hydrogen industry, offshore wind turbines manufactured in Britain and more everyday infrastructure such as home insulation, cycle paths, tree planting and flood defences.

Labour said the public spending was justified to prevent costs spiralling further, quoting the Office for Budget Responsibility’s 2021 fiscal risks report, which said delaying significant investment by a decade could double the costs of a green transition.

Martyn1981

Quick video overview from 'Just Have a Think', looking at the idea and reasoning behind building wind turbine towers out of wood.

Wooden wind turbines. Are they really a sustainable alternative?

michaels

This could possibly go in the solar thread

Morocco Solar 'Powerstation' to power UK via 3.6GW link

Firstly very interesting to compare this to HPC

Secondly if 2,400 mile subsea electricity cables now make sense this may completely disrupt the electricity supply market with far flung windy and/or sunny (/geothermal/hydro suitable) locations suddenly becoming energy export centres for intercontinental supply.

QrizB

Hmm, now you've got me wondering if it's practical to build a 4GW geothermal station in Iceland?