Showing posts with label Green Energy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Green Energy. Show all posts

Friday, 3 June 2016

The Energy Return of The Three Gorges Dam | Energy Matters

The Energy Return of The Three Gorges Dam



In preparing my previous post on Net Energy Trends I wanted to include a back of the envelope calculation on the ERoEI of hydro electric power using the Three Gorges Dam as an example. But I got my decimals pretty muddled leading to an answer that was implausible. But I’ve now had a few days off to clear my head and I put a new battery in my calculator and so hopefully the calculation is now on the money.
Looking at just the labour and embedded energy of the concrete and steel and assuming a 45% capacity factor and 70 year life yields a partial ERoEI of 147. And so, despite substantial environmental harm and social disruption I must give dispatchable hydro electric power a big thumbs up. See the calculation below the fold.
The Three Gorges Dam on the Yangtze River in China is the largest hydroelectric scheme in The World. Operational since 2008 it has 22.5 GW installed capacity. The Itaipu Dam on the Parana River between Paraguay and Brazil produces a similar amount of electricity from 14 GW capacity and achieves this through a higher capacity factor.

Wednesday, 1 June 2016

The revealing numbers on solar employment in the USA. | Energy Matters

The revealing numbers on solar employment in the USA.


Once again the green media are being transported into flights of ecstasy over the fact that the US solar industry now employs more people than the US oil, gas and coal industries. The data, however, show that the solar industry contributes virtually nothing to US energy supply, which is still filled dominantly by fossil fuels. Reviews also show that the problem of accurately estimating annual US solar generation has still not been solved.
First we will take a brief look at the US solar industry. How many companies are involved in it? It seems that no one has ever counted them, but as illustrated in Figure 1 they probably number in the thousands. (An interesting feature is the absence of solar companies in much of North and South Dakota. Could this have to do with the fact that these are the most productive areas of the Bakken Shale?):
Figure 1

Friday, 27 May 2016

Net Energy Trends | Energy Matters

Net Energy Trends


In writing Wednesday’s post ERoEI for Beginners, I prepared a number of charts that were not used and these are presented here. Where it has been measured and according to the literature, the net energy of oil, natural gas and coal is falling everywhere. Surface mined US coal has one of the highest energy returns of any fuel and is substantially higher than deep mined Chinese coal. In electricity equivalent (Eeq) form, Chinese coal is marching towards the Net Energy Cliff edge while US coal remains far from it. The image shows part of a 50 km long queue of coal trucks in China.
Estimates of ERoEI for solar PV are all over the place (1 to 12) because different analysts set different system boundaries, the energy return is latitude and site specific and its possible that the literature based on historic deployed panels is not up to date with most recent advances.
Sugarcane ethanol in Brazil has ERoEI of 8 to 10 at the refinery gate which at face value seems OK [1]. But to be equitable with its FF cousins this needs to be reduced to 3 to 4 in Eeq form and is barely viable. Temperate latitude biofuels are not viable in liquid form at the refinery gate and converting them to Eeq cripples them completely. But I suppose burning them to make electricity is no less crazy than burning them in an internal combustion engine sat idle at traffic lights.

Wednesday, 25 May 2016

ERoEI for Beginners | Energy Matters

ERoEI for Beginners


The Energy Return on Energy Invested (ERoEI or EROI) of any energy gathering system is a measure of that system’s efficiency. The concept was originally derived in ecology and has been transferred to analyse human industrial society. In today’s energy mix, hydroelectric power ± nuclear power have values > 50. At the other end of the scale, solar PV and biofuels have values <5.
It is assumed that ERoEI >5 to 7 is required for modern society to function. This marks the edge of The Net Energy Cliff and it is clear that new Green technologies designed to save humanity from CO2 may kill humanity through energy starvation instead. Fossil fuels remain comfortably away from the cliff edge but march closer to it for every year that passes. The Cheetah symbolises an energy system living on the edge.
I first came across the concept of Energy Return on Energy Invested (ERoEI) several years ago in Richard Heinberg’s book The Party’s Over [1]. I had never contemplated the concept before and I was immediately struck by its importance. If we used more energy to get the energy we need to survive then we will surely perish.
[1] Richard Heinberg: The Party’s Over – oil, war and the fate of industrial societies. Pub by Clairview 2003

Friday, 6 May 2016

Armstrong Economics - The Electric Crisis in Europe

The Electric Crisis in Europe




Electric Cars
Part of the global warming/climate change deals, many people do not realize that in Europe there will be no more gasoline and diesel cars on the streets come 2020. From Norway to India the year 2020 will mark the end of petrol or diesel vehicles. This is part of the long-term bear market in energy. Germany wants to bring at least million electric vehicles on the roads. However, this energy policy presents a crisis. They never realized that to prevent cars from using oil based energy, they have to get ready for a 25%-30% increase in power consumption. Shutting down nuclear power plants means you are transferring one pollution source for another.  Meanwhile, Germany was to shut down all nuclear power by 2022. Nobody seems to have figured out the coordination of these two trends.


Wednesday, 13 April 2016

The Archdruid Report: American Narratives: The Rescue Game

American Narratives: The Rescue Game


Last week’s post here on The Archdruid Report, with its analysis of the way that affluent white liberals use accusations of racism as a dog whistle for their own bigotry toward wage-earning Americans, got a flurry of emails and attempted comments trying to push the discussion back into the officially approved narrative of race in the United States. That came as no surprise, at least to me. Every society has a set of acceptable narratives that frame public discourse on any controversial subject, and trying to get past the narrow confines of any such narrative inevitably brings some form of pushback.

Depending on the society and the era, the pushback can quite readily include such entertainments as being burnt at the stake for heresy, so I don’t feel any need to complain about the really rather mild response I got. At the same time, though, I don’t propose to back down. Every society, as just noted, has a set of narratives that confine discourse on controversial subjects to approved channels, but tolerably often those approved channels exclude crucial details and head off necessary questions. In today’s United States, in particular, the facts concerning nearly every significant crisis we face can be divided up neatly into two entirely separate categories. The facts that most Americans are willing to talk about belong to one of these categories; the facts that matter most belong to the other.

Thus one of the things I plan on doing over the months ahead is talking about some of the narratives that keep most people in today’s America from discussing, or for that matter noticing, the most crucial forces dragging this country down to ruin. Such an examination could as well start with any of those narratives—as Charles Fort pointed out, one traces a circle starting anywhere—but given the response to last week’s post, we might as well start with the accepted narrative about race.

Friday, 1 April 2016

Wednesday, 30 March 2016

Estimating life-time costs for Renewable Energy in Europe | Energy Matters

Estimating life-time costs for Renewable Energy in Europe


Guest Post by Ed Hoskins that originally appeared on edmhdotme. A short bio for Ed is given at the end of the post.

Summary

  • Electricity generation by using gas-fired installations is significantly cheaper than Renewables in terms of both installation capital cost and Operation and Maintenance  costs, even when accounting for the cost of fuel.
  • The € 1.1 trillion capital costs already spent on Renewables in Europe would have been sufficient to re-equip the whole 1,000 Gigawatt European electricity generating fleet with Gas-fired power stations producing electricity for the grid effectively at ~90% capacity.
  • The European Renewable fleet with a nominal nameplate output of ~ 212 Gigawatts only contributes ~ 38 Gigawatts to the European Grid, a capacity percentage at about 18%.
  • The installation of the Renewables fleet as of 2014 has already lead to a 60 year lifetime financial commitment amounting to about €3.1 trillion:  this is equivalent to the annual GDP of Germany.
  • 60 year life-time costs of Onshore wind power range from 10 – 13 times more expensive than Gas-fired generation.
  • 60 year life-time costs of Offshore wind power and Solar power range from 40 – 50 times more expensive than Gas-fired generation.
  • during the 60 year life-time Gas-fired generators have a full-time productive capacity of about 90%  whereas the combined capacity figures for Renewable Energy of only about 18% is achieved across all European Renewable installations.
  • These notes make estimates of:
    • the likely capital expenditure over 60 years
    • the running costs including fuel costs, if applicable, over that time period
    • the likely combined 60 year costs overall
    • the ratios of Renewable financial performances compared to Gas-fired electricity generation.

Introduction

This article is concerned with the two main forms of weather-dependent Renewable Energy, Wind Power (Onshore and Offshore) and Photovoltaic solar power.
In the UK this amounts to ~75% of all installed Renewable Energy.  The other Renewable Energy  inputs are traditional Hydro power ~8% and the remainder are other sources such as biomass, waste and landfill gas amounting to ~17%:  they are not considered here.

Monday, 28 March 2016

Cassandra's Legacy: The climate wars: trench warfare or blitzkrieg?

The climate wars: trench warfare or blitzkrieg?


In a previous post , I examined more than 25 years of Gallup polls in the US and I came to the conclusion the climate debate is stuck...

One Step Closer to Blackouts | Energy Matters

One Step Closer to Blackouts


On Thursday 24th March, Longannet Power Station closed down. This 2.4 GW, coal fired giant, was the beating heart of Scottish Electricity supply. The station opened in 1970 and was arguably past its sell by date. The Scottish supply is now based on nuclear, wind and imports with a little hydro and gas on the side. I think nuclear and wind is likely the worst combination for any grid that no sane power engineer would design. Variable and intermittent wind does not sit well with constant, base load  nuclear power. We have reached this point in pursuit of Green dogma.
In this post I examine the policy and politics that led to this event and go on to consider the social and economic consequences of a nation-wide blackout that power engineers now believe is far more likely than before.

Wednesday, 23 March 2016

How oil price volatility explains these uncertain times | Energy Matters

How oil price volatility explains these uncertain times


Guest post by Tom Therramus that is the pen name of a US based Professor. The article was first published on Oil-Price.Net
The numbers say that these should be the best of times for America. The economy has been growing for five years. Unemployment is low. Inflation is almost nonexistent and gas is cheap. Yet, many Americans feel deeply uneasy about their future prospects. Uncertainty is the catchword of the moment. This uncertainty is contributing to growing pessimism and anger – discontent that is no doubt a factor in the unsettled state of the 2016 Presidential race.
If times are good, why do so many Americans believe that it is the worst of times? Have we become a nation of neurotics or is something real going on?
In a 2013 article at Oil-Price.net, prior to the beginning of the 2014 collapse in oil price, I proposed that turbulence in the oil markets was on the way. In a subsequent essay in early 2015, I suggested that this instability in the oil markets would lead to a period of turmoil in the stock market in the coming year or so.

Tuesday, 8 March 2016

ClubOrlov: Harm/Benefit Analysis

Harm/Benefit Analysis


According to Kaczynski, we need to reject organization-dependent technologies that tie us into the technosphere, and cultivate organization...

Sunday, 6 March 2016

Cassandra's Legacy: An epochal change: have CO2 emissions peaked?

An epochal change: have CO2 emissions peaked?


The projections that had been circulating during the past few months turned out to be correct. Now, it is official: the global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions peaked in 2014 and went down in 2015. And this could be a momentous change. Don't expect the emission peak, alone, to save us from the impending climate disaster, but, if CO2 emissions will start an irreversible decline, then we need to rethink several assumptions that we have been making on how to deal with climate change. In particular, depletion is normally assumed to be a minor factor in determining the trajectory of the world's economy during the coming decades, but that may not be the case. Depletion is not a good thing in itself, but it might help us (perhaps) to stay within the "safe" limits and avoid a climate disaster...... 

Monday, 29 February 2016

Syrian Peace Plan: US Seethes at Its Humiliation by Russia

Syrian Peace Plan: US Seethes at Its Humiliation by Russia


A very well sourced article, which has recently appeared in The Wall Street Journal (attached below), shows the extent of the policy disarray in Washington following the US-Russian “cessation of hostilities” agreement.
It seems there has been a massive row.  
The heads of the US military and the CIA are clearly furious at the way in which they feel the US has been humiliated, and in a series of angry meetings in the White House they have made their feelings known.
Though they rationalise their anger with talk about how Russia cannot be trusted, and how US allies in the regions like the Turks and the Saudis feel betrayed, that is what it amounts to.

Thursday, 11 February 2016

UK Blackout Risk – Amber Warning | Energy Matters

UK Blackout Risk – Amber Warning



In recent months, three companies have announced closure of 4 large coal-fired power stations in the UK representing a total loss of 6.671 GW base load capacity*. Combined with closure of 1 nuclear station and the pending closure of two CCGTs, total capacity loss in 2016 will amount to 8.726 GW. If there was a blackout risk this winter, then things will obviously be much worse next winter.
In effect traditional generators are throwing in the towel confronted with a neo-Marxist system of production quotas, targets, subsidies, levies and regulation that places their superior technology at an impossible disadvantage to inferior wind and solar power, both of which are useless in averting a blackout risk when it is highest during a calm winter evening. UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, Amber Rudd, needs to re-discover her Tory credentials and sort this situation out.

Wednesday, 10 February 2016

The Archdruid Report: Renewables: The Next Fracking?

The Archdruid Report: Renewables: The Next Fracking?: I'd meant this week’s Archdruid Report post to return to Retrotopia, my quirky narrative exploration of ways in which going backward ...