Green & Ethical Investment News and Suggestions

Coastalwatch

While the thrust of Renewable investment has naturally been focussed on Wind and Solar which looks set to  continue for the immediate future other aspects are also gathering momentum.Tidal has finally been given government recognition so we can expect progress to accelerate here in the coming years.

By the way, not a recommendation to invest in any, although I have!

Of growing importance and focus is that of energy storage where opportunities exist for attractive rates to be earned for grid balancing and dynamic containment services. While these may be seen as short term brought on by the current Gas situation I can't see the demand for such services reducing significantly until we have a mix of energy generation capable of supplying our day to day requirements and easily a decade or possibly two away if Nuclear is being relied upon to play any significant part as the governments direction appears presently.

Battery storage facilities continue to grow and the one we were furtunate enough to invest with at placement has just released it's figures for the previous twelve months. Without going into detail  they have had some impressive returns which has subsequently seen their share price rise again. Currently trading at £1.54 from their base of £1 in November 2018, added to this are the dividends totalling 20% since so a healthy return i between time.

They are to double the size of their operation by end of first quarter next year with a similar figure to be added in the following twelve months thus having a portfolio of sites totalling 1.5 GW into 2023. Not large by the scale the grid will require but appears to have a bright future until some form of long term storage becomes available at comparable cost.

While Gresham House Energy Storage Fund was a great investment at £1 a share back in 2018 then as to whether the new price of £1.54 will be likewise, one can only summise!

Sadly I've no crystal ball, just a desire to invest with ethics and sustainability as priorities. So probably green around the gills as well.

Exiled_Tyke

The only tidal RE company I know of which is open to investment is Simec Atlantis.  It's been through a very rough period with equipment problems and then it's Uskmouth biomass project failing to get planning approval.   It may now finally be on the up as it's starting to generate power again and has government support from Scotland. However it still has a shed load of loans through Abundance which need to be restructured.   I sincerely hope they manage to pull it round as to lose this company would be a huge loss to RE innovation. As others have said, tidal is a wonderful predictable source of energy.   

Coastalwatch

Thanks for the update on Simac ET, I hope they manage it to survive it all too.

On the tidal energy front their are no less than four others listed on the Seedrs platform either generating energy or associated with it. Not in any particular order and certainly not a recommendation although I do have a small interest in each. They are Achelous Energy Marine Power Systems Nova Innovation and QED Naval .

The former only recently came into being and valued the least at circa £7m while at the other end of the scale are MPS valued at circa £67m.

NigeWick

Exiled_Tyke said:

 It's been through a very rough period with equipment problems and then it's Uskmouth biomass project failing to get planning approval.   

"biomass"

Isn't that still burning stuff? I for one don't cal that green.

Exiled_Tyke

NigeWick said:

Exiled_Tyke said:

 It's been through a very rough period with equipment problems and then it's Uskmouth biomass project failing to get planning approval.   

"biomass"

Isn't that still burning stuff? I for one don't cal that green.

The argument is that they are burning stuff that would go to landfill and decompose there. By putting it into a generator: 1,  Energy is produced which (given the flexibility of supply using this method) would most likely replace FF burning, so definitely an improvement there. Also I guess some of the waste would release the same energy if it were to decompose but isn't captured and so no benefit.  2. In burning waste in this way the waste can be captured and cleaned or reused.   

Below is information about the Leeds RERF site. I'd guess similar recovery and regulation would have been planned for the Uskmouth plant. 

The Energy Recovery Process

The Energy Recovery Facility operates within the UK and EU standards for emissions to atmosphere. 

When all the recyclables have been removed the remaining waste is burnt in carefully controlled conditions. The heat from the combustion process is used to turn water into steam. The steam  then powers a turbine to generate around 13MW of electricity for export to the National Grid.  This is enough to power in the region of 22,000 homes.

The ash (known as Incinerator Bottom Ash) that comes out of the end of the process, which can contain gravel-like remnants of glass, brick, stone, concrete and ceramics, are recycled into construction aggregate, which replaces quarried material in the production of asphalt and cement. 
 

Air pollution control

The gases from the boiler are extensively cleaned. This includes neutralising any acid gases, removing pollutants with ‘activated carbon’ and capturing fine particles with a fabric filter. The gas treatment residues known as Air Pollution Control Residues (APCr) are kept in enclosed storage on site and then transported safely to a licensed facility for further treatment and disposal. This APCr material is actually then used in further chemical processes and is used in industrial acid neutralisation.

So is it ideal? Of course not but it's a massive improvement over some of the alternatives. And given the current government's enthusiasm for nuclear and increasing FF extraction and back-benchers desire for fracking (which would take years to produce a result) I would give this full support. 

2nd_time_buyer

Exiled_Tyke said:

NigeWick said:

Exiled_Tyke said:

 It's been through a very rough period with equipment problems and then it's Uskmouth biomass project failing to get planning approval.   

"biomass"

Isn't that still burning stuff? I for one don't cal that green.

The argument is that they are burning stuff that would go to landfill and decompose there. By putting it into a generator: 1,  Energy is produced which (given the flexibility of supply using this method) would most likely replace FF burning, so definitely an improvement there. Also I guess some of the waste would release the same energy if it were to decompose but isn't captured and so no benefit.  2. In burning waste in this way the waste can be captured and cleaned or reused.   

Below is information about the Leeds RERF site. I'd guess similar recovery and regulation would have been planned for the Uskmouth plant. 

The Energy Recovery Process

The Energy Recovery Facility operates within the UK and EU standards for emissions to atmosphere. 

When all the recyclables have been removed the remaining waste is burnt in carefully controlled conditions. The heat from the combustion process is used to turn water into steam. The steam  then powers a turbine to generate around 13MW of electricity for export to the National Grid.  This is enough to power in the region of 22,000 homes.

The ash (known as Incinerator Bottom Ash) that comes out of the end of the process, which can contain gravel-like remnants of glass, brick, stone, concrete and ceramics, are recycled into construction aggregate, which replaces quarried material in the production of asphalt and cement. 
 

Air pollution control

The gases from the boiler are extensively cleaned. This includes neutralising any acid gases, removing pollutants with ‘activated carbon’ and capturing fine particles with a fabric filter. The gas treatment residues known as Air Pollution Control Residues (APCr) are kept in enclosed storage on site and then transported safely to a licensed facility for further treatment and disposal. This APCr material is actually then used in further chemical processes and is used in industrial acid neutralisation.

So is it ideal? Of course not but it's a massive improvement over some of the alternatives. And given the current government's enthusiasm for nuclear and increasing FF extraction and back-benchers desire for fracking (which would take years to produce a result) I would give this full support. 

That is one element there are also:
- Energy crops
- Agricultural crop residues
- Forrest resides
- Wood processing residues
- Wet waste (i.e. sewage gas) 

It is probably easier to defend carbon neutrality on these other sources

I quite like the simplicity of local waste recovery. I am not entirely convinced that recycling is always that beneficial. Partly because it often amounts to landfill in another country and also I am suspicions that the energy use in transportation and the recycling process may sometimes outweigh the benefits. Recycling can be taken advantage for purposes of green washing when the real solution is not to make the waste in the first place.
    

Exiled_Tyke

2nd_time_buyer said:

  

That is one element there are also:
- Energy crops
- Agricultural crop residues
- Forrest resides
- Wood processing residues
- Wet waste (i.e. sewage gas) 

It is probably easier to defend carbon neutrality on these other sources

Yes you are right and I'm wrong.  

"Biomass pellets are made at a pelletisation plant. Here wood that is unsuitable for other industries like sawmill residues, are brought together."

So presumably the only other alternative for this would be waste, hence landfill decomposition and releasing carbon? If this is the case then biomass is accelerating carbon release but isn't creating excess.  And given that trees can be replaced then with an appropriate plan is a whole lot better than using !!!!!! or nuclear. 

2nd_time_buyer

So presumably the only other alternative for this would be waste, hence landfill decomposition and releasing carbon? If this is the case then biomass is accelerating carbon release but isn't creating excess.  And given that trees can be replaced then with an appropriate plan is a whole lot better than using !!!!!! or nuclear. 

Yes, although some can be used for recycled wood e.g. MDF, chipboard; woodchip for landscaping;  paper, cardboards etc. It is safe to say that the vast majority of UK timber is from sustainable fast growing sources so I don't think it will significantly speed up carbon release.

Martyn1981

Just to say, that in line with the current discussion on biomass / bio-energy, I've just posted an article on the energy thread about bio-energy from sewage treatment works, including 'coal', and I think it's fair to say that this is a sustainable source of material, maybe not everyone's first choice, but certainly number 2.

2nd_time_buyer

 not everyone's first choice, but certainly number 2.

You should be ashamed