Green, ethical, energy issues in the news

paul991

yes but there's no excuse for England not being  over100% too 

QrizB

paul991 said:

yes but there's no excuse for England not being  over100% too

I'm going to assume that's a joke, otherwise you're sounding like Michael Gove as education secretary when he stated that he was looking forward to the day when every UK school was above average!

(See question 98 here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmeduc/uc1786-i/uc178601.htm )

Coastalwatch

QrizB said:

paul991 said:

yes but there's no excuse for England not being  over100% too

I'm going to assume that's a joke, otherwise you're sounding like Michael Gove as education secretary when he stated that he was looking forward to the day when every UK school was above average!

(See question 98 here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmeduc/uc1786-i/uc178601.htm )

Effectively England does have an oversized storage facility too in Europe via the interconnectors. Another small step towards Energy security, if that's not too sensitive a term to use.

Martyn1981

paul991 said:

yes but there's no excuse for England not being  over100% too 

That's the eventual plan, though I'll say for the UK, not England, as so, so much generation will come from Scotland.

The UK's potential for net export of RE leccy is massive, based on the generation from off-shore wind. Some years ago Boris 'stole' a term I'd seen over a decade ago, referring to the UK becoming 'the Saudi Arabia of wind energy'. It's certainly possible, but will require us to continue rolling out a large amount of offshore wind.

For the UK to reach 'net zero' we will need to export RE leccy equal to or greater than the amount of RE and FF leccy we import, and FF leccy we generate and consume. [I'm simplifying as there will also be nuclear generation and measures like tree planting, to consider too.]

The UK is the Saudi Arabia of wind energy

paul991

The ban on onshore wind, The abrupt  way the FIT scheme was phased out. The delays with National  grid
the delay on removing Vat on battery storage. Recent Govts have been saying the right things but only implementing them when they have no choice .(GREEN ****)

Martyn1981

I saw this article a few days ago, and thought it very sad, but have since pondered a potential silver lining for oil and the worst polluting producers.

Canadian tar sands pollution is up to 6,300% higher than reported, study finds

Toxic emissions from the Canadian tar sands – already one of the dirtiest fossil fuels – have been dramatically underestimated, according to a study.

Research published in the journal Science found that air pollution from the vast Athabasca oil sands in Canada exceed industry-reported emissions across the studied facilities by a staggering 1,900% to over 6,300%.

Academics said this means that damaging reactive pollutants from the oil sands are equivalent to those from all other human-made sources across Canada with severe health implications.

Keith Stewart, a senior energy strategist for Greenpeace Canada, said: “In quantifying the astonishing and largely unreported levels of health-damaging air pollution coming out of oil sands operations, these scientists have validated what downwind Indigenous communities have been saying for decades. This is making people sick, so our governments can and should require these companies to use some of their record-breaking profits to clean up the mess they’ve made.”

So ..... what possible good news could there be? Well, not only are the Canadian tar sands extraction one of the dirtiest processes in the World, but they are also one of the most expensive ways to produce oil. Coupled with the fact that it attracts a lower value per barrel, since it needs more expensive refining, then it will hopefully be one of the first types of oil production to be priced out, as demand and value fall. Similarly, US frack oil is more expensive to produce, and comes with greater emissions, largely through the fugitive emissions of methane, and the flaring off, of methane gas. [There is often no value for the methane at the oil fracking sites, as there is no local demand, nor method to transport it.]

Hopefully we will hit peak oil very soon. China may achieve it this year, with their dramatic shift to EV's. The sales of new ICE vehicles peaked in 2017, at about 96m, and have been in terminal decline ever since. In 2024, vehicle sales may set a 4yr high of about 90m, but last year about 14m were PEV's (plug-ins, ~70% BEV's), and next this year could be closer to 20m, with China alone now at an annualised rate of about 10m.

We may have hit peak ICE fleet in the last couple of years. It lagged behind peak ICE sales, as the lower number of new ICEV's, needs to be compared with the lower sales numbers from about 15-20yrs ago, for those vehicles being displaced/ageing out. And peak oil is lagging a little further behind, as newer vehicles have grown larger and heavier.

Once oil demand peaks, then prices will fall. To stop this happening, production will need to be scaled back, as per OPEC's move last year. But as oil production has grown, with more countries outside of OPEC, it's possible that supply will exceed demand. If oil demand does go into an annual decline, then it may be necessary for nations to try to sell their oil now, before demand and prices fall further. If that happens, then the most expensive production will become unprofitable, and have to shutdown. Thus, Canadian tar sands, and US frack oil, may be the dirtiest, but also the first to decline.

Unless oil production can be reduced in line with demand, we may see a falling 'saw toothed' price trend, as it declines, then gets a temporary boost from reduced demand as a supplier drops out. Rinse and repeat.

Yes, I'm reaching for a positive, but at least there may be one, just!

Magnitio

Here's an example of what's happening in Canada:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7s-BgfcFXw

Not recommended viewing for the sensitive.

QrizB

I like their honest ads. They did one for the UK too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sRoYvFTE3c

Caution, strong language.

I thing the production company are Australian. You'll find the rest of their work here:

https://www.youtube.com/@thejuicemedia/videos

Netexporter

Excellent.

Martyn1981

This week's Carbon Commentary newsletter from Chris Goodall:

1, E-fuels for aviation. NGO Transport and Environment says that there are now 25 industrial scale projects in Europe seeking to manufacture synthetic fuels for airplanes. If all are built, they will provide about 1.7 million tonnes of aviation kerosene, or about 4% of total current needs. This comfortably meets the EU quotas for 2030. But Transport and Environment warns that none of these proposed plants have received formal go-ahead from their investors. That’s probably somewhat harsh because projects such as Infinium’s in France with Engie will almost certainly go into construction. Nevertheless the NGO is right to note that synthetic fuels plants, alongside many other hydrogen production projects, are not moving ahead as fast as hoped.

2, Carbon negative cement. Conventional Portland cement is made using fossil fuels to heat limestone sufficiently to drive off large amounts of CO2, leaving calcium oxide. This process is responsible for about 9% of world emissions including both the burning of the fossil fuels for heat and the emissions from the breakdown of the limestone. Multiple new businesses around the world are working on replacements for cement. The alternatives usually use raw materials such as steel slag which are processed at low temperatures. Very limited amounts of carbon dioxide are emitted. A very new Bahamas company makes a cement substitute that goes further by absorbing atmospheric CO2 in the production process, making its product potentially carbon-negative. Germany’s TopWerk, one of the world’s leading cement equipment manufacturers, endorsed the product this week saying ‘The company’s carbon negative binder is one of the most exciting innovations we have witnessed in our industry for decades. It is the most advanced alternative binder solution in the market and the only credibly carbon negative solution that has the potential to scale globally’.

3, Artificial spider silk. The filaments of a spider’s web are surprisingly strong, equalling steel for each unit of weight. Until now, attempts to replicate the spider’s silk have failed. Many used corrosive chemicals and energy-intense chemical reactions. Now researchers in Japan have successfully used ‘biomimicry’ to copy the spider’s own processes for making silk. An article in The Engineer magazine summarised the success by saying that the researcher’s tiny machine was ‘able to recreate the complex molecular structure of silk by mimicking chemical and physical changes that naturally occur in a spider’s silk gland.’ This invention is a long way from commercialisation but offers a potential replacement for textile fibres including silk but also polyester.

4, Underground hydrogen storage. If hydrogen is to be used in large quantities, the world will need huge amounts of underground storage. Other storage sites are not available in large enough volumes. Government have been slow to recognise the importance of early construction of storage caverns and the European gas transmission industry has banded together to push for faster action on storage. The new group calculates that only 9 terawatt hours of hydrogen storage is likely to be available in Europe by 2030 but that 45 terawatt hours is needed. I think the gas transmission participants have exaggerated the investment cost of the required new caverns, giving a figure of up to €36 billion, but there’s no doubt that major funds will need to be committed, largely in advance of hydrogen electrolyser capacity.

5, Solar panel prices. A French PV engineering firm publishes a regular estimate of solar panel prices. The latest figures show the decline continuing, with the average price falling by almost half over the past year. The cheapest panels are now selling for about 9 Euro cents a watt. The site predicts further falls over the coming months. (Thanks to Raymond Betz)

6, Sodium ion batteries. A very useful article looked at sodium ion batteries in the wake of the first shipments of a Chinese car using this new type of cell. Sodium ion uses cheaper raw materials than lithium ion, works better in the cold, is safer and charges more rapidly. What’s not to like? Principally that this chemistry will have a lower ratio of stored electricity to weight. The new batteries are said to contain about 120 watt hours per kilogramme, or less than half what a new Chinese Tesla battery offers. Forecasts are that the sodium energy density may increase to 200 watt hours per kilogramme within a few years, but analyst Rob West says that lithium ion phosphate batteries will increase by a similar percentage. One further clear advantage of sodium is that it is abundant in China, meaning the country will be less reliant on imports of lithium. I think we can expect that most smaller and cheaper cars, particularly those made in China, will switch to sodium over the next few years.

7, Nuclear delays. Constructor EdF said that the new EPR power station at Hinkley Point on the south west coast of England will be delayed further. Cost inflation means the plant will require funding of up to £46bn in current money. Both construction time and the final bill will therefore be at least twice what was predicted at the start of the project. This power station will eventually offer about 8% of the electricity consumed today in the UK. The problems with the EPR design - ‘a cathedral within a cathedral’ in one expert’s view – are now well known. However it is not all bad news. The World Nuclear Association forecasts completion of 16 new nuclear power stations around the globe this year. The striking fact is that these sites use 10 very different designs. Standardisation on a single model (which definitely wouldn’t be the EPR) may be necessary to get costs down to reasonable levels. But the obvious candidate is a Chinese design and no Western country is going to pursue this option.

8, Microgrids. The ultimate purpose of large-scale microgrids is to be able to disconnect from the electricity distribution network either to save money or to be able to offer supply even when the wider grid is unavailable. One potential route is for town and cities to take over much of the distribution of electricity in their areas, but leaving a residual connection to the outside network. The university town of Ann Arbor in Michigan, home to about 125,000 people, intends to build a series of microgrids that will operate alongside the existing infrastructure, but not replace it. A home might have two meters, one for electricity bought from the Ann Arbor publicly-owned venture and another for power consumed from the private utility that currently supplies all customers. This is a complicated scheme facing significant engineering challenges but the aim is to increase the rate of decarbonisation of Ann Arbor electricity sources by giving a route to market for a large number of newly installed solar and other low carbon power sources. If implemented this proposal would be the first of its type in the US (and perhaps in the world?). My sense is that the Ann Arbor transition will prove difficult and expensive but that the lessons learnt will be extremely valuable for other communities around the world seeking their own rapid decarbonisation.

9, Electric truck charging. WattEV, a new business in California that operates its own electric heavy trucks and runs charging stations said that it would install one megawatt chargers at two locations. That’s twenty times the conventional ‘rapid’ charging rate. No vehicles on the road can yet charge at this speed but manufacturers are expected to develop trucks soon that can absorb this power. Tesla trucks will already accept 750 kilowatts. WattEV promises to develop 25 hectares of solar near to the two charging stations along with 5.5 megawatt hours of battery to reduce the strains on the local grid from the truck charging.

10, Lithium and geothermal energy. The very hot underground brines in some parts of the world can be used to make electricity and to extract lithium at the same time. One of the best worldwide sources is likely to be the Salton Sea in southern California. Last Friday saw the groundbreaking ceremony for the first joint production plant. The Australian company Controlled Thermal says that its eventual seven wells will generate 350 megawatts of electricity as well as 175,000 tonnes of lithium hydroxide a year. This is equivalent to just under one third of current world requirements for the metal. (Lithium hydroxide is about six times the weight of lithium metal).  Joint production of power and lithium is also moving ahead in the Upper Rhine valley in Germany. Vulcan, another Australian company, received local permission in December to build the infrastructure necessary to extract heat and metal. The company says that this single site will meet about 4% of current global needs for lithium at a competitive cost. It’s been a long journey already for these businesses, and there are many technical challenges still to overcome, but geothermal brines may eventually provide a large fraction of world lithium needs. (This depends on the success of the sodium ion batteries in Note 6). Developers in Cornwall, England, where there are also substantial resources of rich lithium in geothermal brines, will be watching carefully.