Archive for the ‘Energy’ Category

Wind power has less potential than claimed and the role of gas is underestimated

August 14, 2011

That the intermittent nature of solar and wind power inherently limits how such capacity can be installed and despatched seems pretty obvious but has always been underestimated by the renewable energy lobby. As subsidies are reduced in the face of government cutbacks and as the still very high costs of renewable power work their way into electricity tariffs some of the “green sheen” surrounding solar and wind power is becoming decidedly tarnished.

A new  study of the UK energy system has been published by the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies 

The Impact of Import Dependency and Wind Generation on UK Gas Demand and Security of Supply to 2025

By Howard Rogers

Summary: This paper by Howard Rogers challenges the assumption of UK government policy papers and projections that, as a result of substantial increases in renewable and other low carbon generation capacity, the role of gas in the will decline rapidly over the next decade and beyond. The study suggests that gas will retain a central and undiminished role in the UK power generation sector. Although its role in the power generation sector may change, gas is likely to be particularly important in respect of ensuring security of supply in the context of increasing intermittent wind generation. As a result, additional gas storage will be needed and, given current market conditions, immediate attention needs to be devoted to creating incentives to ensure this will be provided.

The Telegraph writes:

UK Windpower targets are ‘unfeasible’

Howard Rogers, senior research fellow at the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies, said in a study that Britain’s power network is not built for wind power accounting for more than a third of capacity on the system.

He said that any more than 28 gigawatts of wind would mean it is likely that turbine owners would regularly have to be paid to keep capacity off the system. Earlier this year, six wind farms were paid £900,000 to stop generating for one night, because the system became overloaded.

The study challenges the ambitious estimates in a study commissioned by the Government which estimates that 58 gigawatts of wind is likely to be built in a “medium activity” scenario by 2030, out of a total system of 80 gigawatts of capacity. …. Mr Rogers said this does not fully consider the ability of the grid to cope with the intermittency of wind, which often does not blow at all or can be too strong, causing overload.

“It would appear that the more ambitious targets for wind generation in the UK have been formulated without a full appreciation of the costs and complexities caused by the intermittency of very substantial levels of wind generation,” the report says. “The analysis concludes that the maximum feasible level of wind generating capacity is 28 gigawatts.

At higher levels than this, the country faces the prospect of short notice intervention to reduce turbine output with the added complication that forecasts of wind speed beyond six hours into the future are inherently uncertain.”

The Oxford Institute for Energy Studies is allied to three Oxford University colleges but also receives funding from “members” and sponsors, such as gas producers BP and BG Group and companies with huge investments in wind power, including Centrica and Dong Energy. Its gas research is also sponsored by National Grid.

Professor Jonathan Stern writes in the preface to the study: “It is no part of the remit of the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies gas research programme to promote natural gas, either in the UK or more generally. We are gas researchers not advocates or lobbyists. However, our research increasingly suggests that the likely future role of gas in energy balances has and continues to be underestimated.”

Related:

Wind stops wind power….. 

Bio-gas is out, shale gas is in and there is no “peak” gas in sight!

A nano-battery on a nano-wire

August 2, 2011

“Nano” will surely be the word of the year in science and “graphene” – I predict – will be the material of the year. No doubt the words will also be used to generate unjustified publicity in many cases. But such is the interest and the potential that the developments in nano-technology will accelerate  and it will not be long before applications are in every-day use. One of the limiting factors is the availability of energy sources at the nano-scale but even that limitation may soon be overcome.

A research team at Rice University have managed to squeeze a whole lithium-ion energy storage device into a single nanowire, which could be used as a rechargeable power source for future generations of nanoelectronics.  The work is reported in a paper published by the American Chemical Society’s Nano Letters

Building Energy Storage Device on a Single Nanowire by Sanketh R. Gowda, Arava Leela Mohana Reddy, Xiaobo Zhan, and Pulickel M. Ajayan, Nano Lett.DOI: 10.1021/nl2017042, July 14, 2011

Abstract Image

Nano-wire battery

Abstract

Hybrid electrochemical energy storage devices combine the advantages of battery and supercapacitors, resulting in systems of high energy and power density. Using LiPF6electrolyte, the Ni–Sn/PANI electrochemical system, free of Li-based electrodes, works on a hybrid mechanism based on Li intercalation at the anode and PF6 doping at the cathode. Here, we also demonstrate a composite nanostructure electrochemical device with the anode (Ni–Sn) and cathode (polyaniline, PANI) nanowires packaged within conformal polymer core–shell separator. Parallel array of these nanowire devices shows reversible areal capacity of 3 μAh/cm2 at a current rate of 0.03 mA/cm2. The work shows the ultimate miniaturization possible for energy storage devices where all essential components can be engineered on a single nanowire.

From PC World:

A team of scientists has created a battery so small that it fits into a “nanowire,” a wire whose thickness is less than the wavelength of visible light. It’s the smallest battery ever made, and it could end up powering a whole generation of nanotechnology.

The potential of nanotechnology—the practice of building machines so small that they can’t even be seen—has been talked about for decades. In medicine, for example, the idea of creating tiny robots that could enter a person’s bloodstream and target intruders or diseased cells has been touted as one of the most promising applications of the field, but it’s remained purely theoretical.

One of the hurdles standing in the way of such wondrous nanodevices is their power supplies—making batteries at such a tiny scale is difficult. Now a team of engineers from Rice University appears to have solved that problem by creating a battery just 50 microns, or about the thickness of a human hair.

To create the battery (see the diagram), the researchers first coated a nanowire template with a thin layer of copper. They then filled the pores (which create the individual nanowires) halfway with a nickel/tin alloy to create the anodes. At this point, they put on a thin layer of polyethylene-oxide gel, which acts as both an electrolyte and an insulator from the other nanowires. Next they filled the remainder of the pore with a polyaniline material to create the cathodes. A layer of aluminium goes on top to complete the circuit.

Every nanowire is just 150 nanometers (nm) thin. To put that in perspective, the lowest wavelength of visible light is about 400 nm. However, the complete battery is about 50 microns tall, or about the width of human hair. The researchers ended up creating an array of nanowire batteries that was about 0.08 square inches in area, though it’s theoretically scalable to even larger sizes.

With a larger array that includes several layers stacked on top of each other, the tech could theoretically lead to batteries with massive energy density. And since the electrochemical materials don’t contain lithium, they’re easy to synthesize and manipulate at room temperature.

The nanowire batteries aren’t without their limitations, however. After being charged and discharged 20 times, they lose their ability to hold a full charge. The researchers are working on addressing this limitation, however, by playing with the polymer thickness and trying out different kinds of electrodes.

Although it’s in the early stages, the new battery technology could help usher in an era of practical nanomachines. With a real microscopic power source, the science-fiction scenario of tiny machines acting as doctors, builders, and explorers just took a step toward reality.

The team had reported last December on the creation of 3-D nano-batteries

Last December, Ajayan’s team encased vertical arrays of nickel-tin nanowires in PMMA, which is a polymer known as Plexiglas. The Plexiglas was an electrolyte and insulator in this case, and the nanowires were grown by electrodeposition in an anodized alumina template on top of a copper substrate. The template’s pores were stretched with a chemical etching technique, causing a gap between the alumina and the wires, and then the researchers drop-coated PMMA to enclose the wires with a smooth covering. The template was removed with a chemical wash, and a forest of tiny electrolyte-encased nanowires appeared. This particular battery had encased nickel-tin as the anode and a cathode had to be attached to the outside, but in the new battery packs, the cathode is packed into the nanowires.

The team created two versions of the battery pack. The first combines a nickel-tin anode, polyethylene oxide (PEO) electrolyte and polyaniline (PANI) cathode layers, which allows for the efficient movement of lithium ions through the anode to the electrolyte and the cathode. The ions are stored in bulk allowing the device to charge (and discharge) rapidly.

The second version squeezes the same characteristics into a single nanowire, with centimeter-scale arrays containing thousands of nanowire devices where each is approximately 150 nanometers wide. 

The new process uses PEO as the electrolyte, which stores lithium ions and acts as a electrical insulator between the nanowires in an array. The widened alumina pores were drop-coated with PEO to coat the anodes, and leaves tubes at the top allowing PANI cathodes to be drop-coated as well. The circuit is finished off with an aluminum current collector placed at the top of the array. 

Renewable Energy follies: Subsidies discourage maintenance

July 6, 2011

A key problem with subsidising “renewable energy” is that the economics become so distorted that developers/owners focus first on maximising the extraction of subsidies and not on the long-term operation of the plant or the production of power. As soon as payback is achieved the focus is on generating revenues while minimising  expenditure on operation and maintenance (O & M). Inevitably such plants are abandoned as soon as the O & M costs approach the level of revenues. Whereas conventional power plants (coal, gas, hydro and nuclear) have a design life of 30 – 40 years and often carry out maintenance to extend this lifetime, subsidised “renewable energy” plants have a lifetime of less than 10 years and often even less.

For example grants for construction and high tariffs were used for many years to encourage sugar producers in India and Brazil and other countries to build power plants burning bagasse (the waste matter left after crushing sugar-cane to extract juice). But the consequence was that sugar producers could generate more revenue by producing power rather than sugar – especially when the sugar price was low. Sugar producers built power plants which were larger than they needed themselves and based solely on the level of grant that could be extracted. Access to the grid was guaranteed. But again many of these plants were abandoned as soon as the O & M costs became too onerous. Effectively the developers had recovered all the investment (which was mainly grant money anyway) and more from the allowed 16 – 20% rate of return (which in practice was more like about 30-50% ) of the supposed investment. As plants were “cashed out” and abandoned, the grid just had to absorb the disturbances – which were not negligible.

The subsidies in Europe for wind and solar power are encouraging the same behaviour. In Germany the almost profligate subsidy regime has encouraged the implementation of less than serious power projects by less than serious developers. The game has been the extraction of subsidies not of generating power. In Germany wind turbine and photo-voltaic solar cell plants popped up everywhere. Farmers and shop-keepers and schools all have became power generators. Grid stability has been weakened to cope with the plethora of small plants cutting in and out of the grid. The obscenely high feed-in tariffs in Spain have encouraged solar plants to burn more gas than permitted and pass off the power generated as being “renewable power” at the high tariff. But as the subsidy regime weakens and tariffs reduce and grants are scaled down, the likelihood of these plants being abandoned is increasing. Certainly there is no incentive to spend any money on maintenance.

P. Gosselin at NoTricksZone has this about a pv solar plant (2.7 MW) after less than 2 years:

Weed-Covered, Neglected Solar Park: 20 Acres, $11 Million, Only One And Half Years Old! 

solar plant weeds

Over the next few years we shall see many more solar and wind power plants in Europe where money will not be spent on maintenance unless it is absolutely necessary for the generation of short-term (subsidised and inflated) revenues. Long-term maintenance will just not happen. And when the O & M costs become too onerous the plants will simply be abandoned. No doubt bankruptcies will be arranged when the plants are cashed-out such that there is no recourse to the developers/owners for any remaining liabilities.

Subsidies just don’t work for their intended purpose in power generation – but they are short-term gold mines for some developers.

Tepco shares rise sharply on reports of planned break-up and nationalisation

July 4, 2011

Tepco shares rose almost 20% today as reports on Sunday described government plans to break-up the Japanese utility and to nationalise its nuclear plant assets.

Market Watch:

 

Senior members of Japan’s government have been involved in secret plans to break up the operator of the beleaguered Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, according to reports. 

The plan would see the nuclear operations of Tokyo Electric Power Co. JP:9501 +19.82%  come under government control, said Reuters, citing a report Sunday in a local paper.

The plan has been devised by Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshito Sengoku, said Reuters, citing the Mainichi daily. The newspaper said its information was from unnamed sources.

As well as nationalizing the nuclear business, the plan would see Tepco sell its power distribution business, said Reuters. Power-generation operations that use thermal and hydraulic power plants would remain as the company’s business. 

The plan would shred Tepco’s size, according to the reports, leaving it with 1.6 trillion yen ($19.8 billion) in power industry assets compared to its current 7 trillion yen.

The reports state that Sengoku has met several times with Tepco Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, and has informed Katsumata about the plans.

Also Sunday, The Wall Street Journal said the company has restarted the use of contaminated water to cool the reactor cores at Fukushima, one week after an initial attempt was suspended because of leaks. Tepco is hoping to achieve a cold shutdown, lowering the fuel rods’ temperature to below 100 degrees Celsius, by January.

Related:

https://ktwop.wordpress.com/2011/03/29/tepco-leadership-in-disarray-as-share-price-drops-to-47-year-low-and-government-considers-nationalisation/

https://ktwop.wordpress.com/2011/03/30/tepco-stocks-are-on-their-way-to-losing-all-value/

UK to outsource wind farms to Ireland

June 20, 2011

From the ever-reliable Guardian comes the story of high level diplomatic activity to get Ireland to be the wind-power producer for the UK.

I wonder if this means that all the UK taxpayers subsidies for wind power will also then flow to Ireland?

Ireland’s unspoiled, windswept west coast could become the focus of a new wave of wind farm construction in the wake of a high-level diplomatic meeting to be held tomorrow in London.

UK deputy prime minister Nick Clegg, Taoiseach Enda Kenny and other senior members of the British-Irish Council will gather to discuss a plan to expand electricity grid connections throughout the British Isles. In particular, they want to build new inter-connectors to link the electricity grids of Ireland and Britain in order to transmit power from new windfarms in Ireland to England.

The aim of the plan, created by the British government, is to open up remote regions that could provide Britain with more power generated by wind farms, as well as by tide and wave plants, and so reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

Republic of Ireland, Kerry county, Dingle peninsula, Sleahead beach

Sleahead beach on the Dingle peninsula in Kerry, Ireland, which fierce winds make suitable for turbines. Photograph: Hemis/Alamy

“The west coast of Ireland has some of the fiercest winds in Europe,” said Charles Hendry, the UK energy minister, who will be attending the meeting. “They whip in off the Atlantic which makes it is an ideal location for wind farms. However, the Irish market for electricity is less than a tenth of that of Britain. That means that companies cannot afford to build wind farms in Ireland because there is no market for their power. We want to put that right.”

The construction of wind farms in Ireland that would supply power to neighbouring countries could help to put the UK back on track in its use of clean, renewable energy. Britain has recently been criticised for falling short of its targets for constructing wind power plants and for cutting its carbon emissions. Importing clean power could help to resolve the problem.

Rio Tinto wins battle for Riversdale coal as major shareholder Tata Steel accepts offer

June 16, 2011

I had posted back in December last year about the battle for the acquisition of 13 billion tons of coking and steam coal reserves with Riversdale in Mozambique.

Riversdale Mining Ltd. has 13 billion metric tonnes of known coking and thermal coal reserves in its Benga and Zambeze projects in Mozambique. A global battle is now hotting up for the acquisition of Riversdale . International Coal Ventures Ltd., an Indian state-run joint venture, is studying an offer for Riversdale Mining Ltd. to counter a A$3.9 billion ($3.9 billion) bid from Rio Tinto Group.

The largest share holder was Tata Steel and they have now decided to exit. Hindustan Times reports

 

After months of speculation, steel major Tata Steel on Thursday said it had sold off its entire 26.27% stake in Australian mining firm Riversdale, facing a takeover from giant Rio Tinto, for Australian $1.06 billion (approximately Rs4,940 crore). It is a rich exit, as the Tatas have doubled their investment in a 4 year period.

Rio Tinto, which had made an open offer to the shareholders of Riversdale in March that had been repeatedly extended to a final deadline that now closes on Friday, sees its shareholding go up from 73.20% to almost 99.7%. 

The British-Australian group had said it planned to delist Riversdale from the Australian bourses and Tata Steel, which had for long maintained that it wanted to remain invested in the company, said on Thursday that it finally decided to sell the stake in the absence of a pact with Rio.

“Tata Steel has decided it would not want to hold its equity investment in Riversdale Mining Ltd which is proposed to be delisted, without any joint venture agreement with the majority shareholder in unlisted Riversdale Mining Ltd,” Tata said in a statement to the Bombay Stock Exchange.

“The sale represents around 100% appreciation of value in less than 4 years since its first investment,” it said.

Even as more shale gas becomes available and “peak gas” becomes less and less likely, the value of coal assets is also increasing. Shale gas may well lead to a move back to fossil energy and the future availability of gas does not seem to hurt the value of coal.

The Age of Fossil Fuel may be just beginning

June 3, 2011

A little bit over the top from Michael Lind in Salon but still fundamentally not wrong:

Are we living at the beginning of the Age of Fossil Fuels, not its final decades? The very thought goes against everything that politicians and the educated public have been taught to believe in the past generation. According to the conventional wisdom, the U.S. and other industrial nations must undertake a rapid and expensive transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy for three reasons: The imminent depletion of fossil fuels, national security and the danger of global warming.

What if the conventional wisdom about the energy future of America and the world has been completely wrong?

As everyone who follows news about energy knows by now, in the last decade the technique of hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” long used in the oil industry, has evolved to permit energy companies to access reserves of previously-unrecoverable “shale gas” or unconventional natural gas. According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, these advances mean there is at least six times as much recoverable natural gas today as there was a decade ago.

Natural gas, which emits less carbon dioxide than coal, can be used in both electricity generation and as a fuel for automobiles.

……

Two arguments for switching to renewable energy — the depletion of fossil fuels and national security — are no longer plausible. What about the claim that a rapid transition to wind and solar energy is necessary, to avert catastrophic global warming?

The scenarios with the most catastrophic outcomes of global warming are low probability outcomes — a fact that explains why the world’s governments in practice treat reducing CO2 emissions as a low priority, despite paying lip service to it. But even if the worst outcomes were likely, the rational response would not be a conversion to wind and solar power but a massive build-out of nuclear power. Nuclear energy already provides around 13-14 percent of the world’s electricity and nearly 3 percent of global final energy consumption, while wind, solar and geothermal power combined account for less than one percent of global final energy consumption. ….

In the meantime, it appears that the prophets of an age of renewable energy following Peak Oil got things backwards. We may be living in the era of Peak Renewables, which will be followed by a very long Age of Fossil Fuels that has only just begun.

Read complete article

 

Power generation from shale gas is here to stay

May 31, 2011

The capital cost of building different types of power plants is a reality that cannot be wished away:

November 2010 Capital costs for power plants

Gas fired combined cycle plant use the least capital of all power generation plants. With shale gas set to become even cheaper than natural gas and with gas fired plants having capacity factors well above 90% compared to the 25% of wind power or the 30% of solar plants, it is a no-brainer to conclude that wherever shale gas is available it is going to be used for power generation.

Where it is not available coal fired plants and nuclear plants will continue to be used.

Intermittent renewable power plants are going to need subsidies for a long time to come to get anywhere near the cost of electricity from gas. At best they could be useful to augment production of electricity but being intermittent cannot really contribute to reliable capacity.

Bio-gas is out, shale gas is in and there is no “peak” gas in sight!

May 6, 2011

Shale gas is abundant and now beginning to undercut the price of other sources of natural gas. It is already cheaper than LNG transported around the world which requires both terminals for liquefaction and receiving stations for evaporation. Gas-fired power plants are relatively cheap and quick to build. In simple-cycle operation gas turbine based power plant provide the economic method of choice for emergency power and peak power. In combined cycle operation they provide the highest efficiency of all types of fossil fired electricity generation (around 60%). The ratio of gas price to coal price determines whether this can be cheaper than coal fired power generation.

Shale gas is abundant: map via Wikipedia

Total oil, gas and coal resources in the Earth’s crust are estimated at more than 570,000 exajoules. The world will use about 450 exajoules (billion billion joules) of fossil fuel energy this year.

Exajoule

The exajoule (EJ) is equal to 1018 joules. The 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan had 1.41 EJ of energy according to its 9.0 on the Richter magnitude scale. Energy in the United States used per year is roughly 94 EJ.

Matt Ridley:

Quantity is not really the point; price is. Most fossil fuels are impossibly hard to extract at a reasonable price. More than half the reserves consist of methane clathrates hydrated gas found mostly on the seabed near the margins of the continents in vast quantities. Nobody knows how to turn them into fuel except at huge cost, although the Japanese are on the case. So the question is not whether we run out of fossil fuels but whether we run out of cheap fossil fuels.

With oil, the answer may be “yes”. A huge amount of oil is still untapped, but most of it is under deep water or in oil sands and is costly to extract. But with gas, the answer is “no”. Most free methane is found in impermeable rocks such as shale, not in permeable “traps” whence it is easiest to extract. Shale gas was thought to be as inaccessible as clathrates, and when it began to be exploited in the 1990s it looked as if it would still come in at the top of the price range. Now technological improvements have brought the price down so far that it undercuts conventional gas. 

The “shale-gas shock” will have far-reaching consequences. It will make gas prices lower and less volatile relative to oil than ever before.

This will cause gas to take market share from coal, nuclear and renewables in electricity generation, and from oil in transport. London buses should follow Washington and Delhi in switching to gas both to save money and to produce less smog.

Shale gas is good news for America and China (which probably has even more of it than America), consumers (cheap fuel means higher standards of living) and farmers (fertiliser is made from gas). It is bad news for Russia and Iran (which hoped to corner the gas market in coming decades), for coal (until now the cheapest fuel for electricity) and for the nuclear and wind industries. The last two had expected to be rescued from dependence on subsidies by rising fossil fuel prices. They may now not be.

The losers are formidable enemies, so there is a movement, whose fans range from Gazprom to Greenpeace, to strangle the shale-gas industry at birth, by claiming that drilling for it contaminates water with carcinogenic and even radioactive chemicals. This turns out to be true only in the sense that coffee is carcinogenic, bananas radioactive and dihydrogen monoxide (water) a chemical.

The use of gas for power generation is perfectly sustainable into the foreseeable future. As the hysteria and alarmism around carbon dioxide causing global warming is debunked and begins to fade away the fashionable and unsustainable focus on bio-gas will also die away. The price of electricity production from gas will be the benchmark for judging whether wind and solar power make any sense. Without artificially imposed penalties on carbon or carbon taxes on fossil fuel, bio-gas can never be more than a marginal fuel of little significance. For bio-gas to have any significance catchment areas become so large that food production is adversely affected. The cost of production is relatively high. Without a carbon dioxide scare and the resulting subsidies, wind and solar power are still not able to compete against any form of fossil fuel power generation or hydro power or nuclear power.

But the success of technologies for the extraction of shale gas ensures availability of significant quantities for a long time to come. These quantities are so large that there is no “peak” in sight and all the alarmist “peak” gas scenarios are rendered meaningless.

Moving peaks: Peak gas will never come

Related: Europe told of potential shale gas bonanza

Energy saving light bulbs are not so friendly after all

April 26, 2011
Modern fluorescent light bulb with E27 thread ...

Image via Wikipedia

From The Telegraph:

Fears have been reignited about the safety of energy saving light bulbs after a group of scientists warned that they contain cancer causing chemicals.

Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on. Peter Braun, who carried out the tests at the Berlin’s Alab Laboratory, said: “For such carcinogenic substances it is important they are kept as far away as possible from the human environment.”

The bulbs are already widely used in the UK following EU direction to phase out traditional incandescent lighting by the end of this year. But the German scientists claimed that several carcinogenic chemicals and toxins were released when the environmentally-friendly compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) were switched on, including phenol, naphthalene and styrene. Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps. “I, therefore, use them only very economically. They should not be used in unventilated areas and definitely not in the proximity of the head.” ……

The latest report follows claims by Abraham Haim, a professor of biology at Haifa University in Israel, that the bulbs could result in higher breast cancer rates if used late at night.

He said that the bluer light that CFLs emitted closely mimicked daylight, disrupting the body’s production of the hormone melatonin more than older-style filament bulbs, which cast a yellower light.

The Migraine Action Association has warned that they could trigger migraines and skin care specialists have claimed that their intense light could exacerbate a range of existing skin problems.

Related: 

Bring back my incandescent light bulb!

A reprieve for incandescent bulbs?