Green Building Forum - What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Neil K — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 12:47:32 +0100

Posted By: biffvernonA dirty power station is cleaner than a very dirty power station but we are stuck between a rock and a hard place. Frankly, we need to stop burning coal. Completely. Now. And that's not going to happen. As well as CO2 emissions, the critical problem with gas fired power stations is that the gas supply becomes increasingly problematic into the future. Unless we adopt the CAT approach, as flagged up by Sam, we're squashed.

I agree that the idea of stopping burning coal right away is unachievable at present. Of course we need to stop and get to renewables, but we can't get there in one jump. I would offer the thought that we need to cut the Carbon as soon as we can, but we have to recognise this may be in steps, not one mighty leap.

If we can get coal based generation with greater efficiency then this would help, and surely the use of improved coal efficiency but with MANDATORY district heating must be a sensible interim. I am not sure on the present efficiency figures being quoted for coal, but the ones I have seen seem to be predicated on increased electrical efficiency only. What sort of figures can we get to overall with district heating?

Of course the same issue really applies to gas based generation. What can we get to with district heating and combined cycle gas?

The risk as I see it is that by saying NO COAL we end up with someone shrugging their shoulders and committing us to even less palatable 50s technological dead ends. Surely we need to build our way out of this carbon corner in achievable steps?

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 14:29:48 +0100

How I see it:- Fossil fuels will run out -- FACT

At present we use a mix of fuels and once the fossil fuels run out we will only have renewables and these will will be distributed by means of electricity.

Therefore electricity will be the fuel distribution medium of the future and it will always be ever increasing.

You make it sound like a bad thing, but there is no alternative for the masses apart from not using energy i.e. microgeneration,mud huts etc which are not so bad

We need to develop renewables at a faster rate though people don't want wind turbines or tidal power schemes near them, they will come.

The transport fuel of the future will have to develop too and we don't like biofuels as they restrict food production but they have a big part to play too.

I think I would tax fuel more and use the revenue to build more renewable means of generation, tax and actively penalise wasteful uses of energy.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

ted — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 19:31:36 +0100

Mark, re your question on emissions from power stations - here is a report from WWF that details those from the 30 worst offenders in Europe, generally all coal.

http://assets.panda.org/downloads/european_dirty_thirty_may_2007.pdf

I haven't seen comparable figures for gas but they will be much lower. The UK's saving in CO2 emissions from electricity generation since 1990 are almost entirely due to the switch from coal to gas power stations.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Chris Wardle — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 20:01:40 +0100

It would make sense to try to smooth out grid demand over a 24 hour period. This would help with the capacity problems we will start to encounter as demand rises and the nuclear stations go off-line over the next 20 years. We all have appliances with delayed start functions but how many people actually used them?

It would a good idea to fit visible, variable rate meters in all buildings. This would encourage conservation as it would be obvious what you were spending and it would incentivise people to put the washer etc on over night on cheap rate. We could also charge cars overnight if and when we finally get some plug in, diesel hybrids on the market.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Jeff Norton (NZ) — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 00:07:10 +0100

Dirtiest power station table

Germany 10, UK 10. But Germany wins on points difference for being higher up the dirty table

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

ted — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:52:25 +0100

Well, at least it didn't have to go to penalties.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 10:52:48 +0100

Neil>we need to cut the Carbon as soon as we can, but we have to recognise this may be in steps, not one mighty leap.
True, but we also need to recognoise that the human species could go the way of the trilobites if we trigger a global warning quivalent to the end-Permian event.

Tony>Fossil fuels will run out -- FACT
Not if we leave some of it underground. It's our choice.

Jeff>Germany 10, UK 10.
Not a very level playing field. Germany had to contend with the East Germany legacy, and their current PV and wind development is greater than UK.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Jeff Norton (NZ) — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 21:35:43 +0100

I have always thought of Germany as a leading light but there legacy was news to me! At least they are proactively looking for alternatives.
Here in NZ the Pike river coal mine is being floated on the stock exchange and has a NZ$20 million over subscribtion so greed still out weights the environment!

As Chris mentioned, I believe the smart metering (variable tarrifs) is the first critical step to make the existing system more efficient, transfering market spot rates to the customers should help balance load and generation.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Pingy — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:13:45 +0100

With regard to CO2 capture here's a link to what is happening in the power generation market.......

http://iww.alstom.com/altair/news/ALSTOM_news/2006/37135.EN.php?languageId=EN&dir=/altair/news/ALSTOM_news/2006/

90% capture of CO2 emissions sounds like it might give the world a little bit more time.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

wellburn — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 00:19:15 +0100

talk of nuclear / coal power plants is all well and good.
I think you / we should look closer to home.
the more anal we get about our own power use, - the more sensitive we get about the waste we see around us.
SO,
keep it simple at home, - and complane like hell to every waster you see around you.
be the change you want to see.
P

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Chris Wardle — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 20:21:52 +0100

There are a lot of "wasters" around, we will all be hoarse...

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

funcrusher — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 21:52:07 +0100

The problem with the eco-minded is that they are detached from reality. The mass of humanity is in no position (and would not anyway) give up its energy-intensive lifestyle. Furthermore, we all want high-tech medicine, dentistry and communications etc which are inherently dependent on modern industry. No amount of wishful thinking will make the numbers add up using all the solar, wind, wave, methane and other green-powered generators you can devise. Only nuclear has the immediate, timely and proven facility to displace fossil fuels on a global scale. Green sources will be just a curiosity sideline for the foreseeable future. Of course if nuclear had not first been associated with bombs, the eco brigade wouyld be clamouring for its expansion....

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

nigel — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:18:21 +0100

Current known resources of uranium amount to approx 70 years at current usage. If we switch all energy to nuclear then supplies of uranium will rapidly diminish.

Nuclear is not a panacea and is not risk free. If it were private capital would be rushing to fund it - it isnt.

The worst aspect of nuclear is that it promotes the view that whilst we have nuclear we can be profligate with energy and we do not need to change.

We have to reduce energy consumption and use our natural resources more lightly.

The problem with nuclear supporters is that they are wishful thinkers.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:27:47 +0100

There are some very nasty by-products which result from nuclear. these are both highly toxic and radioactive and difficult to deal with safely. Some would say impossible to deal with. I would rather not have nuclear for those reasons. never mind the dangers from accidents or disasters.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:44:53 +0100

When the Greenland and West Antarctic Ice Sheets melt, British nuclear power stations will occupy interesting positions, Dungeness will be a few miles off shore.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 09:14:10 +0100

What volume of water would be needed to raise the sea level by one meter? A whole lot more than that -- ten times or 100 times?

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

ted — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 09:35:14 +0100

According to this it could be 4-6m

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=276

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Chris Wardle — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 11:28:01 +0100

There are some very nasty by-products from burning fossil fuels which are far more difficult to deal with than nuclear waste. For that reason, I think we should stop using them and start using alternatives, one of which is nuclear power, as well as wind, solar and the rest.

I think it about time there was a definitive international study of what nuclear fuel resources we have and can expect to find and what contribution nuclear power can make towards out electricity needs. It needs to be done quickly. There is such a wide range of opinion over this issue that you just don't know who to trust. There are the anti-nuclear camp who would argue black was white to prevent further use of nuclear power and the pro-nuclear lobby who might in the industries' back pocket.

We need to follow that with an international treaty to allocate these resources to countries that can use the technology safely with other arrangements (e.g. cross subsidies to pay for renewables and carbon capture technologies) for those that can't or don't want to. I don't want to see us fighting over uranium supplies any more than I want to see us fighting over access to fossil fuels.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 17:22:07 +0100

Funny thing about this so called science is:-

1) when the arctic ice melts sea levels don't rise (Archimedes) all that ice is floating!!!!! ( a minuscule ammount due to temperature rise may be)

2) ditto ice floating in the sea off Antarctica.

3 ) nearly all the ice sheet in Greenland is below sea level !!!!!!!!!

Get out of that if you can Tony

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 17:35:14 +0100

In order for sea levels to rise be 4 to 6 m lets say 5m Antarctica and Greenland would need to be covered in an ice sheet 112m average depth and for this to melt.

Problem is that it ain't nothing like that deep.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Mike George — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:16:38 +0100

nice one tony

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:21:01 +0100

Trouble is that Tony is completely wrong.

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Mike George — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:24:26 +0100

Would you like to explain why?

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:28:59 +0100

Most of the sub-glacial land surface of Greenland is above sea level. Much of the ice is over two kilometres thick. The maximum ice surface elevation is 3207 metres above sea level

Honestly, I can't understand why tony should want to post such cr**p, or why Mike should rush to believe him.

Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenland_ice_sheet

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

tony — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:48:31 +0100

it seems pretty cold today to me

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:53:33 +0100

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

Mike George — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 19:31:33 +0100

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

alexc — Sat, 14 Jul 2007 23:56:58 +0100

Late night comment.
I agree with Biff.
Energy models (see theoildrum.com -yayada) predicted a new energy supply now. Its not happened. Ever increasing power uses. or more bluntly, and truthfully - ever more eletric devices that consume little power, but a lot together consuming power, are dead ends. We must, right now force compnies to look at near zero power divices. And we, switch the damn things off.
I have enjoyed an age of cheap power. I am trying to get myself in gear to deal without energy on tap.
I reckon Oil peaked in winter 2006. We are now going down. I know i am off beat, big deal, have been all my life, always been near right.

Nigel, I do not belive you, the oildrum analysis of Uranium resources has more credo(30-40 years of uranium)

Biff, Do you do courses?

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

alexc — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 00:07:29 +0100

Oh and

Mike. Biff has you on a double whammy, Ice and snow reflect light really well. Extraordinary well. Without that the world would warm uo damn fast in the all light summers they have up North or South, ie bad news. The futher it warms, the quicker Ice in greenland melts. The are four countrys in Europe that should care, Netherlands, Italy,UK and Danes, the rest do not have so much to lose. Check out the googlemaps on global warming, http://flood.firetree.net/

What to do about ever-increasing electricity requirements?

biffvernon — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 08:23:45 +0100

That map is rather fun. I live in the blue bit (and it stays blue down to 2m). Reckon we need a barrier across the Humber and the Wash and much higer defences from Hull to Kings Lynn. And we'd better get on with it while the economy can still cope :(