Green Building Forum - Fuel for the 21st Century?

Green Building Forum - Fuel for the 21st Century? Sat, 18 May 2013 16:28:57 +0100 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/ Lussumo Vanilla 1.0.3 Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130468#Comment_130468 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130468#Comment_130468 Mon, 16 Jan 2012 23:33:25 +0000 Gavin_A Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130478#Comment_130478 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130478#Comment_130478 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 07:43:22 +0000 JSHarris
The issue was a simple one. MOD had invested heavily in a radar capability that wasn't due for replacement for another decade or two. It took the view that the windfarms would prevent it doing its primary function - defending the realm - and that therefore there shouldn't be any windfarms in that area.

If MOD spent its defence budget on replacing the radar systems when it wasn't needed from a defence perspective then they would have had to do without new equipment in another area, maybe costing lives. The Treasury wouldn't give MOD more money to do this extra work, as the Treasury view was that it had nothing to do with defence.

Now, had government been joined up MOD might have suggested that the radars be modified at someone else's expense, but they just considered the matter closed once their objections had been upheld. It took a bit of lateral thinking and several years of development time to come to an arrangement where the industry part-funded the changes needed to the radar systems.

There is an analogy here with things like airport developments, where if an airport operator wants to open a new runway they will often have to pay for soundproofing measures on schools, houses, offices etc under the new flightpath. In this case a problem that is wholly caused by windfarms is quite reasonably being paid for by them. It's regrettable that it's take a long time to resolve, but given that the development, test and certification cycle for a radar system like this is normally around 10 years I'm not that surprised.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130483#Comment_130483 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130483#Comment_130483 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 08:19:16 +0000 Joiner ]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130495#Comment_130495 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130495#Comment_130495 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 09:53:34 +0000 Brianwilson A weekend press report claims UK “green” policies will cost £200 billion and add 20% to fuel bills. There are also the external and social costs to consider. In 2009 The Gov quantified the £billions of additional “social cost” resulting from anticipated use of biomass to provide 52 TWh of energy. This cost figure became a gross underestimate when the Gov increased allowable hazardous emissions from biomass combustion by 50-300% in March 2011. This means the fundamental hazardous particulate pollution created will equate to 54 million additional diesel vehicles each travelling 20,000 km/yr based on EURO5 and 6 vehicle emissions data.
Waste burning to energy processes and some biomass projects display high levels of additional acidic output which also impacts on building fabric. NOX and SO2 many times higher than combustion alternatives, emissions volume and hazardous content many times higher than Continental processes. We appear to fixate on carbon and ignore overall impact of the processes we intend to support financially in the 21st Century.. A typical press report yesterday extolled the virtues of using horses to remove fallen timber from woodland to burn in biomass boilers at various schools in Sheffield thereby saving carbon. We are aware the best biomass boilers are shown to produce levels of most hazardous air pollution at least 30 times higher than NG, woodchip, the preferred fuel displays 60-80 times higher pollution. Children are especially vulnerable to the pollution a concern exacerbated by inversion characteristics of the chosen combustion system .The press report claims removal of the timber helps wildlife but research questions the basic eco impact of removing fallen timber from woodland!
Another press report claims we are way behind Austria on use of biomass combustion but fails to detail 80% of wintertime particulate pollution is created by woodburning.
We surely need serious scrutiny of our decision to pump £billions into dubious renewable projects e.g. I remember Steamy T publishing a claim made by incineration plant operator that emissions would be cleaner than air drawn into plant. Checking operational data revealed S02 burden 260 times higher than alternative combustion per unit of useful power out with plant efficiency below 16% and emissions volume 20,000 cubic metres /tonne processed. German data 3-5500/ tonne processed.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130574#Comment_130574 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130574#Comment_130574 Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:32:56 +0000 Joiner :confused:

]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130764#Comment_130764 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130764#Comment_130764 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 17:47:54 +0000 Brianwilson http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/18/shale-oil-gas-us-energy-self-sufficient
Can the Uk follow same route or is size crucial re possible impact consequences?]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130815#Comment_130815 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130815#Comment_130815 Wed, 18 Jan 2012 21:28:53 +0000 renewablejohn Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130945#Comment_130945 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130945#Comment_130945 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:19:53 +0000 Brianwilson http://www.theengineer.co.uk/sectors/energy-and-environment/news/british-firm-boosts-hydrogen-compression-and-storage/1011435.article?cmpid=TE01
Are we reaching a point where all large turbine arrays should incorporate hydrogen production . This would allow full use of turbine power output and hydrogen could be used to fuel standby plant.
Hydrogen powered vehicles also appear to be making rapid progress.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130947#Comment_130947 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130947#Comment_130947 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 16:28:50 +0000 renewablejohn Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130979#Comment_130979 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=130979#Comment_130979 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 18:05:35 +0000 Brianwilson http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/at-a-glance/main-section/video_orange_locomotive_gets_the_greenest_of_names_1_4155752
Is this a classic oxymoron? :confused:

]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131018#Comment_131018 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131018#Comment_131018 Thu, 19 Jan 2012 23:27:35 +0000 djh Posted By: BrianwilsonAre we reaching a point where all large turbine arrays should incorporate hydrogen production .
As turbines produce electricity and one of the features of electricity is that it is easy to send it from one place to another, there is no need to co-locate turbines and hydrogen (or methane etc) production. It probably makes more sense to build large hydrogen generation stations near where the hydrogen is required. Even more so if you're compressing gas down a coal mine to buffer energy from turbines.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131030#Comment_131030 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131030#Comment_131030 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 08:33:45 +0000 renewablejohn Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131057#Comment_131057 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=131057#Comment_131057 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 10:34:32 +0000 fostertom Posted By: Brianwilsonhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/18/shale-oil-gas-us-energy-self-sufficient" >http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/jan/18/shale-oil-gas-us-energy-self-sufficient"In a development with enormous geopolitical implications, the country's (US's) dependence on oil imports from potentially volatile countries in the Middle East and elsewhere would disappear, BP said, although Britain and western Europe would still need Gulf supplies".

One beneficial geopolitical implication I can think of is that US will no longer need to keep the Middle East in a compliantly chaotic state; in particular it will no longer need to back all of Israel's idiocies. However Europe will still need to be doing all that, it seems.

I wonder in fact whether US is beginning to move to a 'troops home' position of withdrawal from its present role as World's Biggest Terrorist. Leaving the stage to China, India, Brazil etc - which will not just be same play, new actors (any more than the post-WW2 world order was just a replay of the previous European/colonial one).

So not just one (previously two) superpowers wanting it all their way by military, covert and Hollywood-image means,
but perhaps more of a field of multiple influences, alliances, friendships via development - that's certainly how BRICS have been playing it so far.

But Europe still dependant on old-style client-nations for its oil and essential supplies? Will Europe be able to change its mindset - which in many ways still lingers two-back, in pre-WW2 notions.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132208#Comment_132208 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132208#Comment_132208 Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:56:49 +0000 Brianwilson http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/jan/27/biofuels-biodiesel-ethanol-palm-oil
A list of biofuel sources and carbon footprint comparison against crude oil]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132295#Comment_132295 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132295#Comment_132295 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 07:13:11 +0000 SteamyTea Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132297#Comment_132297 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132297#Comment_132297 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 07:37:29 +0000 Joiner
With an essentially "open and unregulated market" [postulate, hence the quote marks] what limits do you set on the biomass industry (the fuel source makes it discrete) and how do you enforce them to avoid the pitfalls?

(And, for the sake of argument, discount the issue of emission-control technology - accepting it, unlike the UK government, as a given after John's and Brian's convincing arguments. I'm asking how the biomass fuel-source issue can be resolved.)]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132298#Comment_132298 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132298#Comment_132298 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 07:49:42 +0000 SteamyTea Then Third Generation technologies (only 5 years ago they some were saying 2G was not viable) such as alga growth and GM modification. Better land management (and ocean/large water bodies for that matter) allied to improvements in food production, storage and distribution would alleviate many of the current issues.
I have no real worries about it sorting itself out, the marketplace always does, the market place is the sum of all needs and wants.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132306#Comment_132306 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132306#Comment_132306 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:09:09 +0000 Joiner
Taking the view that price will be the great leveller ignores the effect that price has on fuel source in the case of this relatively new industry, in fact the effect price has on the basic raw material supply of any industry - the greater the need (which will increase as other fuel sources diminish, whether by depletion in the case of oil, or legislated out in the case of coal), the greater the power of the supplier to control prices in a market where competition rules, favouring the rich over the rest. As a fuel- (as against food-) source, biomass will attract premium prices.

We already know, from indications that it's already starting to happen, that land will be diverted from food to foreign-currency-earning biomass (even allowing for the useable waste-product of some food production) and that overall available land is limited by the constraint of our needing to eat as well as power our life-styles, so another limit to growth of supply which will help to maintain prices and avoid the slump that economists depend on to bring the market back down to earth.

Nick, the expectation that that list of management strategies will alleviate the current issues seems a tad optimisitic to me for the reasons I outline in the first para here, and you outline in your first para above.

I'm deeply pessimistic about the outcome. Many of the arguments presented in this thread seem to assume that only a few of the current industrialised nations will be out buying their biomass fuel stocks on the open market, and that the need for "fuel supplies" is not likely to see vast growth as other, newly-industrialised nations emerge. That's a myopic view based on an optimistic assumption that favours the current 'haves'. Patronising in a way.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132310#Comment_132310 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132310#Comment_132310 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:16:26 +0000 Brianwilson Nick-Unfortunately we appear to have a need to distort the market with misplaced subsidies resulting in expensive environmental consequences, particularly for the UK.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132313#Comment_132313 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132313#Comment_132313 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:37:15 +0000 SteamyTea Posted By: JoinerTrouble is, it's the constant (as borne out by historical events) threat of recession that proves the 'market place' has its weaknesses
Or that is just the market re-adjusting, so it is working fine. Peoples hopes and aspersions just have to adjust to it. The marketplace does not need to adjust for price envy.

Posted By: JoinerAs a fuel- (as against food-) source, biomass will attract premium prices.

Assuming current technology and practices in the supply chain. I often wonder who would go out and buy a 100 MHz, 4 MB Ram computer for £1000, but we did happily 15 years ago. Impossible to speculate on a future price from today's starting point, biomass worked for many thousands of years quite happily as an energy source, the chart is just U shaped, nothing unusual in that.

Posted By: JoinerWe already know, from indications that it's already starting to happen, that land will be diverted from food to foreign-currency-earning biomass

That foreign currency is partly used to buy in food from more productive areas though, does the increase in an areas GDP have to have a net negative affect.

Posted By: Joinerthe expectation that that list of management strategies will alleviate the current issues seems a tad optimisitic

Works well with other energy sources, I have some Coal price data and it is amazingly stable regardless of volume over the last few years, why would that not apply to the biomass market.

Posted By: Joinernewly-industrialised nations emerge

This is two-fold, we have exchanged some industries for others, this makes us look good and other nations look bad, by our self imposed standards. Also the emerging economies are coming into an established marketplace, not as if they are paying less for globally traded commodities than the developed countries. They just use newer technology and better working practices.

Let us create a scenario where one area has all the IP and technical services, and another has all the labour and resources. What do you think would happen, isolation or trade?]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132316#Comment_132316 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132316#Comment_132316 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 09:52:36 +0000 Joiner ]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132317#Comment_132317 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132317#Comment_132317 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:10:11 +0000 SteamyTea Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132322#Comment_132322 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132322#Comment_132322 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 10:52:48 +0000 Joiner
We have been insulated from the consequences of what is now being revealed as profligacy by the ease of comfortable lifestyles.

Given the emerging realities, still largely unknown (which is why some people continue to refuse to acknowledge them), how can anyone predict the future on the basis of history? You can extrapolate from the known, but basing a prediction on some event of which no one has any experience surely cannot be realistic, let alone wise, if future policies are predicated upon those assumptions, because policy is a commitment to a course of action, at the very least a statement of intent towards which resources are directed.

Headless chickens come to mind. :confused:

]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132324#Comment_132324 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132324#Comment_132324 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:08:28 +0000 SteamyTea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_energy_consumption]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132345#Comment_132345 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132345#Comment_132345 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:26:36 +0000 Joiner :crazy:

]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132350#Comment_132350 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132350#Comment_132350 Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:42:34 +0000 SteamyTea ]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132566#Comment_132566 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132566#Comment_132566 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:44:51 +0000 fostertom Posted By: Joinerthe 'market place' has its weaknesses because it is (totally?) dependent on human nature, so can never be as dispassionate or objective as economists try to convince us is the caseIt seems that that obvious point is quite suddenly coming to light. Why didn't we all spot it till now? Friedman/Reagan/Thatcher got us quite mesmerised. The Tory party became synonymous with neo-liberal free-market capitalism, and it's a shock to be now reminded, by a bunch of Tory new-thinkers, that this was never inherently the case, just a 25yr spasm.

Tories and Whigs (aka Libs/Labour) have swopped role as the champions of progressive socio-economic policy several times in their long history. Remember that 'Liberal' originally meant 'free-market', just like Thatcher, and 'Tory' meant (in Irish) 'outcasts because they speak their mind'.

It's incredible that, because no-one trusts themselves, let alone politicians, to make wise economic decisions, for 250yrs an intelligensia has instead put its faith in a mysterious automatic mechanism (deus ex machina) aka 'the market' to make those decisions for us. It's a simplistic delusion, that has incredibly survived unchallenged for twice as long as its similar counterpart, Marxism.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132570#Comment_132570 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132570#Comment_132570 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:16:12 +0000 Brianwilson http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/online-discussion-employee-engagement-carbon-reduction-smes
Details of scheduled online discussion 1400-1600 Wed 1st Feb- Live discussion SMEs engaging employees in carbon reduction. Thought there may be those on GBF with strong opinions and wish to participate !!]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132577#Comment_132577 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132577#Comment_132577 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:59:53 +0000 SteamyTea Does depend on the market. In a monopoly and an oligarchy (which is what we have in the energy market) the market place is virtually homogeneous and there is little scope for substitution. You can change suppliers, but you get the same product. The only thing that changes is price. Within the elastic limits of the kWh supplied, people are free to change virtually as often as they like (they can use more and less as well). Because we do not change much (finding it hard to think of a product that I substitute or change, only one I can think of is coffee when out, but then I am picking the view/atmosphere and not the coffee) and the big supplier know this, they have pushed the price up to the maximum they can get away with. That is normal supply and demand working in the marketplace. If one supplier charged double the market rate, they would soon loose customers, if one charged half the market rate, they would probably soon loose their business, regardless of how many customers they have.
Where irrationality comes in, and in the energy market place it is a niche market, is in 'investing' in alternative energy technology or suppliers. So PV, Wind, Biomass, at the domestic scale, is not sold on price, security of supply or ease of use. It is bought and sold on other grounds (the FIT/RHI notwithstanding as that is substituting one purchase for another i.e. FIT Payments against Bank Savings) such as ethics, moral or idealogical grounds (at the moment). Nothing wrong in that, people are free to spend as they seem fit.
It is not unusual for social scientists to try and fit their beloved pet theories to the marketplace, so far (thankfully) it has not been very successful, just look at the popular music market segment to see how trends change rapidly at the top end.
There is often talk of products that were popular, being taken off the market place only to be reintroduced later. There are a number of reasons for this, one is overall profitability. A classic example of this was with the BMW 5 and 7 series in the 1990's. Most people could not tell the cars apart from a quick glance and the BMW dealers where reporting that they had stocks of unsold 7 series. As the 7 was a more expensive car, the overall profitability (because of stock levels and incentive schemes) was declining. The 7 series was heavily discounted to clear stocks and was sold to 'special order' with a long waiting time. This encouraged the customer to buy the 5 series, which became 'scarce' and therefore desirable and more profitable. Nothing irrational there, cold and calculated I think.

So rational and irrational is really down to the marketplace, not the product, and the marketplace has no ethics or morals, the shopper does, but as the marketplace is the sum of human behaviour, delivered in the most effective manner, it is rational.]]> Fuel for the 21st Century? http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132593#Comment_132593 http://www.greenbuildingforum.co.uk/newforum/comments.php?DiscussionID=6738&Focus=132593#Comment_132593 Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:26:06 +0000 Joiner ]]>