Latest Buzz...
                  

Translate

Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts
Showing posts with label global warming. Show all posts

Saturday, March 16, 2019

Clean nuclear energy with a simple electricity output stage

University of New South Wales researchers led by Emeritus Professor Heinrich Hora have made important breakthroughs recently in developing clean nuclear energy technology.
When a proton (a Hydrogen nucleus) fuses with a Boron-11 nucleus it produces 3 alpha particles (Helium nuclei).
That's it. No radioactive fuels. No radioactive waste.
Hydrogen Boron-11 fusion
Hydrogen Boron-11 fusion

And another result: For each 11 grams of Boron-11 (one mole) converted to Helium, the energy produced is around 230 megawatt-hours.

At the level of individual nuclei, the mass of the three Helium nuclei produced is about 17 electron masses less than the mass of the Hydrogen nuclei (a proton) and the Boron-11 nuclei that undergo fusion to create them. It is this "missing" mass that appears as energy. Specifically this energy is kinetic energy imparted to the Helium nuclei.

Laser-boron fusion now ‘leading contender’ for energy
"The fuels and waste are safe, the reactor won't need a heat exchanger and steam turbine generator, and the lasers we need can be bought off the shelf," says Warren McKenzie, managing director of HB11, which owns the patents to the new technology.

When coal is used to fuel a high-efficiency low-emission "HELE" ultra-supercritical coal-fired power station, carbon dioxide emissions are 900 kilograms per megawatt-hour. The amount of carbon in the coal needed for each megawatt-hour of electricity generated is 900 x (12 / 44) kilograms. That is coal containing 245 kilograms of carbon is burned for each megawatt-hour.

To generate 230 megawatt-hours of electricity in a "HELE" coal-fired power plant coal containing over 56 tonnes of carbon would need to be burned. It would be converted into almost 210 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

Yes. 
That's right. 
56 TONNES of carbon vs 11 GRAMS of Boron-11 for the same electrical energy output.

Coal power plants have another serious handicap. The energy produced when coal is burned is heat energy. Extremely high pressure boilers and turbines are required to spin large generators to convert the heat energy into electricity.

With proton-Boron-11 fusion, the energy produced is in the form of fast-moving positively charged Helium nuclei. This kinetic energy of charged particles can be converted directly into electricity. There is no need for steam boilers, turbines and generators.
While the nuclear reactor is being developed, the technology to create electricity from fast-moving charged particles can be done in parallel. For instance, the ion propulsion test facility at the Australian National University could produce streams of ionised gases to use in developing the electricity production technology.
Professor Christine Charles is Head of the Space Plasma, Power and Propulsion laboratory at the Australian National University.
Professor Christine Charles is internationally recognised for her research on ion acceleration in expanding magnetised plasmas and its applications to a new generation of space engines and advanced material processing.


Update - 5 July 2019 

Progress in research in seemingly unrelated fields may lead to sudden advances, solving tasks that are steps to manufacture small commercial laser-driven fusion electricity power modules.

From this article "Self-Torque: Physicists Discover New Property of Light" on 1 July 2019 for instance -
In 1992, it was realized that light can also possess orbital angular momentum (OAM) when the spatial shape of the beam of light rotates — or twists — around its own axis.
...
In order to realize an entirely new property of light, manifested as a time-varying OAM along the light pulse, JILA physicist Kevin Dorney, University of Salamanca’s Dr. Laura Rego and their colleagues exploited the quantum physics inherent to the high harmonic generation (HHG) process.

“To create that high harmonic generation with light, an intense, femtosecond laser pulse is upshifted to high frequencies of the driving laser by essentially creating a nanoscale radiating antenna from an atom that is in the process of being ionized,” they explained.

“When properly phase-matched, bright, coherent laser-like beams can be generated that span from the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) to the soft X-ray regions of the electromagnetic spectrum.”

Posted by Askgerbil at 4:02 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , ,

Friday, March 15, 2019

Coal lobbyists paid as adviser to Coalition Govt

Brendan Pearson - coal lobbyist and paid Coalition Government senior advisor
Brendan Pearson - coal lobbyist and paid Coalition Government senior advisor
Exclusive

Minerals Council eyes Tania Constable as CEO



Jacob Greber


The Minerals Council of Australia may hire the head of a carbon capture and storage group as its next chief executive after major member BHP forced out the previous chief for being too coal friendly.

It is understood that Tania Constable, a former treasury official with more than 20 years experience in government industry and resources jobs, is a leading candidate for the job. An announcement is due within two weeks.

The appointment has been more than six months in the making after the nation's top resources lobby group unexpectedly parted ways with former CEO Brendan Pearson after BHP threatened to review its membership.

Tania Constable, CEO Co-operative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies, is understood to be a favourite to take charge at the Minerals Council of Australia. Sean Davey
A spokesman for the MCA said the recruitment process is at "an advanced stage of completion" and that an announcement would be made once the process is finalised. "The MCA will not comment on rumour or speculation regarding candidates for the role."

Mr Pearson, who last week joined the office of Trade Minister Steven Ciobo as a senior trade advisor after helping Finance Minister Mathias Cormann negotiate with Senate crossbenchers on company tax cuts, was seen as being too supportive of coal interests.


The rumoured shift to Ms Constable, who would take over from acting MCA chief executive David Byers, suggests the council is continuing the shift away from the combative approach of Mr Pearson's predecessor Mitch Hooke, who spearheaded the politically tumultuous campaign against Labor's ill-fated mining tax in 2010.

Mr Pearson took over from Mr Hooke in January 2014, just as the Minerals Council absorbed the former stand-alone Uranium Association and Coal Council on the understanding it would continue to fight for coal and nuclear power in Australia.

His departure was seen as evidence of the growing impact of the global anti-coal lobby, which is putting pressure on big producers such as BHP to withdraw from the industry.

BHP said last week that it has severed ties with the World Coal Association over differences on how to combat climate change.

The resources giant – which earns around one fifth of its revenue from coal but is moving towards zero emissions from its businesses after 2050 – said it saw little benefit from staying on as a member.

The company was particularly unimpressed with remarks by WCA chief executive Benjamin Sporton in the Financial Review last September where he backed the Turnbull government's dumping of a clean energy target.

Ms Constable would come to the Minerals Council after a lengthy career as a policymaker across resources, energy and natural gas.

She was named as chief executive of CO2CRC (or the Co-operative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies) in late 2014 by its chairman, former Labor resources minister Martin Ferguson.

CO2CRC describes its mission as developing carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a "socially, technically and commercially viable option for net zero emissions" and references research saying it won't be possible to keep global temperatures from rising by more than 2 degrees without CCS.

The MCA is a strong supporter of CCS and its website highlights that more than $300 million has been spent on projects to demonstrate the viability of CO2 capture and storage.

Prior to that post, Ms Constable was chief adviser for Treasury's personal and retirement income division, a job with a heavy tax policy focus. She was also a senior Industry Department official for more than four years where she advised the minister on oil and gas regulation, exploration and other mining activities.

She was awarded the Public Service Medal in 2014 for her work in the creation of Australia's liquefied natural gas and other energy industries.

It is understood the search for the CEO's position is being tightly managed by the MCA board.


Jacob writes about American politics, economics and business from our Washington bureau. He earlier was the Canberra-based economics correspondent and has held reporting jobs in Sydney, Zurich and Brisbane across more than two decades. Connect with Jacob on Twitter. Email Jacob at jgreber@afr.com.au
Posted by Askgerbil at 9:38 PM 0 comments
Labels: , ,

Wednesday, December 20, 2017

Gas Vision 2050 by 2025

Gas Vision 2050 is an Energy Networks Australia report produced on December 18, 2017. Australia’s peak gas industry bodies prepared it to "demonstrate how gas may continue to provide Australians with reliable and affordable energy in a low carbon energy future."

The scope of the report is to "outline how Australia’s gas supply and infrastructure can be a national advantage as our energy mix continues to evolve."


The reports author's missed the option being explored across Europe: make us of Australia’s gas supply and infrastructure as an energy storage system.

This new purpose for Australia’s gas supply and infrastructure has the potential to make a substantial contribution to the economy. For instance, a proposal for a multi-billion dollar development of pumped hydro energy storage "Snowy Hydro 2.0" is years away from becoming a reality. The gas supply infrastructure can begin providing this function almost immediately.

The report describes three technologies under the heading "Decarbonisation Pathways" -
  • Biogas production – Biogas consists of methane and is already produced from municipal solid waste.
  • Hydrogen: Hydrogen can be produced from natural gas or through electrolysis. Hydrogen creates opportunities for clean energy for households, businesses or transport and can also generate zero emissions electricity using fuel cells or gas turbines.
  • Carbon capture and storage (CCS) refers to the process of producing decarbonised hydrogen from gas, coal, or biogas to remove carbon dioxide from the carbon cycle.
There is a fourth technology that has significant potential to accelerate decarbonisation of Australia's gas supply. So much so that the goal the report sets for 2050 may be achieved much sooner.

Biogas can be produced from a great many carbon-containing materials such as farm crop waste, municipal waste, sewage sludge, animal waste and timber waste. In each case about half the carbon combines with hydrogen from water in the mixture to form methane and the remaining carbon combines with the oxygen "left over" from the creation of methane to form carbon dioxide.

The result is a gas that is about 50/50 methane and carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide needs to be removed before the methane is suitable for injection into gas supply pipelines.

Hydrogen can be produced using surplus renewable energy to split water by electrolysis. This is a method of energy storage. Hydrogen may be injected directly into gas supply lines, but the proportion can be no more than 10 percent by volume.
The fourth technology that isn't mentioned in the Gas Vision 2050 report tackles both of the above issues:
Waste materials containing carbon can be reacted with hydrogen. In this process ALL the carbon is converted into methane and NO carbon dioxide is created. So there is nothing to separate from the biogas before it can be injected into natural gas pipelines. The 10 percent limit on the proportion of hydrogen that can be safely mixed with natural gas is no longer an issue...
The biomethane produced via this pathway is achieving two purposes:
  • It is replacing natural gas with carbon-neutral biogas. 
  • It is storing renewable energy in the form of methane for use as required.
Production of Biogas/Methane by Biomass Hydrogasification


This needn't be a permanent part of a zero-emission energy system. While battery capacity investment is ramping up, excess wind and solar power can be stored and distributed as hydrogen and/or methane in the existing natural gas system.

Burning natural gas in heating appliances will eventually be discontinued, but for now, a large number of these appliances are being used. It will be some time before they are all replaced.

Small distributed gas-fueled electricity generation can be up to 60% efficient. These do the job that batteries and pumped hydro will eventually do - when enough of them have been built.

Farmers can replace coal seam gas industry by manufacturing methane from crop waste that is combined with hydrogen made to store  renewable energy.

When there are enough batteries and pumped hydro storage to eliminate the need for natural gas energy resources in Australia, this bio-methane can be used as feed stock in chemical industries to replace coal seam gas. It can also be exported as LNG, substituting for Australia's coal and coal seam gas energy exports.
Posted by Askgerbil at 12:13 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, December 19, 2015

Global warming and climate change news

Posted by Gerbilnow at 4:30 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , ,

Monday, March 16, 2015

Gambling on climate change - no safe bets

Gambling on Climate Change
Gambling on Climate Change

Lectures on the Global Warming Gamble 

Extract of -
The Global Warming Policy Foundation
2011 Annual GWPF Lecture
Westminster Cathedral Hall | 26 October 2011

One Christian Perspective on Climate Change
Cardinal George Pell
Archbishop of Sydney

Let me begin by thanking the Global Warming Policy Foundation for the invitation to deliver this lecture.

Why might a Catholic bishop comment?

We might ask whether my scepticism is yet another example of religious ignorance and intransigence opposing the forward progress of science as is alleged in the confrontations between Galileo and the Papacy in the early seventeenth century, when the Church party on the evidence of scripture insisted that the sun moved around the earth.

It is not generally realized that in 2001 at least, one of the IPCC Third Assessment Report’s Working Groups agreed: “In climate research and modelling, we are dealing with a coupled, non-linear, chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible”.

Arnold helped to explain why the systems around us work, how fluids flow. Like Lorenz, he found that small changes had an immense impact on outcomes. For him long-range weather forecasting was effectively impossible, because small events could have dramatic, unforeseen consequences.


A small event - dramatic, unforeseeable consequences

Changes in Carbon Dioxide and Temperature
Changes in Carbon Dioxide and Temperature (EPA)
Fluctuations in temperature (red line) and in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide (yellow) over the past 649,000 years.
"SMALL" Change: The vertical red bar at the end is the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide levels over the past two centuries and before 2007.
From "A brief history of the universe"

  • Human beings first arrived in Europe about 35,000 years ago.
  • The first cities were only built 8,800 years ago.

An observation on Cardinal Pell's Lecture

Cardinal Pell highlights key attributes of climate science that give little reason for comfort:
  • "In climate research and modelling, we are dealing with a coupled, non-linear, chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible" and
  • "small events could have dramatic, unforeseen consequences."
The implications of this description are perhaps a little obscure.

An example of a non-linear system is a house-of-cards. It is susceptible to sudden collapse when a single card is moved even though it is seemingly stable when other small changes are made. That is, small events can have dramatic, unforeseen consequences.

There are three unfortunate characteristics of such systems -
  • Very small changes can create completely unexpected and seemingly disproportionate changes with little warning.
  • Predicting behaviour of the system will be very difficult. 
  • Removing a "trigger" that seemingly precipitated a disproportionate change will most likely fail to restore the system to its previous state.

Posted by Askgerbil at 9:05 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

Thursday, September 11, 2014

Some mines running at a loss, but future strong - according to Australian coal spin

September 09, 2014

Demand for Australia's high-quality coal will remain strong for decades into the future as global energy needs continue to rise toward 2050, according to Glencore Coal's Mick Buffier.

Addressing the Sydney Mining Club, Mr Buffier acknowledged that Australian mining, in particular the coal sector, is facing significant economic challenges and he estimated that around one third of Australia's coal mines are currently operating at a loss.



Pictured: Mick Buffier with Julian Malnic, Chairman of the Sydney Mining Club

He said there are a number of reasons why costs have risen. "The first one is the high Australian dollar, which is not helping. You can say that during that boom period we did lose control of our costs.

Mr Buffier cited data from the Minerals Council of Australia showed that between 2006 and 2011, the cost of an installed tonne of new mine capacity rose from about $US70 to about $US170 a tonne. "The rest of the world was sitting at about $US120. That's part of the explanation."

But he debunked some of the myths about coal and its future as a source of energy, siting independent analysis showing that prices would again rise despite current economic challenges.

The world's population is forecast to rise from 7 billion to 9 billion by 2050 and he said global energy demand would continue to drive growth from all sources, including coal, for many years.



"Both supply and demand are continuing to rise. Ultimately that oversupply will be caught up. Will it occur at the end of next year? Probably not, but eventually it will come back. Over time, with less investment, that will correct. You only have to go back through the past 30 or 40 years and this has happened many times."

Mr Buffier cited the quickening urbanisation in Asia, in particular in India and China, as well as the hundreds of millions of people in the developing world that will still be without access to electricity in 2030, as to why coal and carbon capture and storage will be part of the answer to the world's growing energy needs.


Glencore Coal is the world’s largest exporter of seaborne thermal coal used to generate electricity and one of the largest producers of coal used to make steel and other industrial applications.
Posted by Askgerbil at 5:18 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Pitiful sob story by head of World Coal Association

Milton Catelin, Chief Executive of the World Coal Association, told Power Engineering International that leaders are wrong not to give more consideration to investment in clean coal technology.
Power Engineering international
Catelin went on to claim -
“We don’t ‘push’ particular clean coal technologies over others.”

“Coal refining could remove other impurities such as mercury and sulphur,” he added. “However, the best earliest action on mitigation that could be undertaken now with off-the-shelf technology would be to raise the global average efficiency at coal power plants from their current 34 per cent to 40 per cent.”
Milton Catelin pleads for world leaders to give coal another chance
Milton Catelin pleads for world leaders to give coal another chance

In reality the coal industry had its chance to develop clean coal as a viable energy resource, and, upon realising that this would reduce demand for coal, turned its back on it.

The head of the World Coal Association is now pushing a pathetic case for coal power plants that achieve only 40 per cent thermal efficiency, feeling safe in the belief that political leaders are so stupid they will throw good money into smoky power plants spewing toxic chemicals into the air and that waste most of the coal poured into their furnaces.
Posted by Askgerbil at 9:18 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, June 30, 2013

Coal and Natural Gas power plants

The World Coal Association says a 600 MWe coal-fired power station operating at 38% efficiency and 75% overall availability will consume approximately 1.5 million tonnes per annum of bituminous coal (Calorific Value (CV) 6000 kcal/kg Net As Received (NAR)).
Coal-fired Power Station Model
Coal-fired Power Station Model

Using this information from the World Coal Association we can calculate how much electricity the coal power plant will produce each year (600 MWe x 24 hours a day x 365 days a year x 75% availability) which is 3,942,000 MWh.

The cost of coal will vary from time to time. For any price of coal we can calculate the yearly cost of coal and the unit fuel cost for the electricity produced.

Coal Price
($ per tonne)		 Annual Cost
($million)		 MWh fuel cost
(per MWh)
60 90 $14.33
80 120 $19.11
100 150 $23.88
120 180 $28.66

The same amount of electricity could be produced by a natural gas power station.

A 600 MWe combined cycle gas turbine power plant operating at 60% efficiency and 75% overall availability will consume approximately 23.85 million gigajoules of natural gas per annum.






The yearly cost of natural gas and the unit cost of the electricity produced will be the same as the coal power plant with the following prices of natural gas:

Coal Price
($ per tonne)		 Natural Gas
($ per GJ)		 Annual Cost
($million)		 MWh fuel cost
(per MWh)
60 $3.81 90 $14.33
80 $5.07 120 $19.11
100 $6.34 150 $23.88
120 $7.71 180 $28.66

Carbon dioxide emissions from the coal power plant will be about 0.8 tonnes per MWh of electricity produced and about 0.3 tonnes from the gas power plant.

If coal costs $60 per tonne and natural gas costs $7.71 per gigajoule the information above implies that electricity from a natural gas power plant will have double the fuel cost of the coal power station.

Cheap coal can be converted into natural gas. 

Why would anyone ever build a coal power plant?

If coal that costs $60 per tonne is converted into natural gas at 80% efficiency, then the fuel for the natural gas power plant can be produced from 1.18 million tonnes of coal costing only $70.6 million a year. This is a saving of $19.4 million every year on the $90 million cost of coal that a coal power plant needs to produce the same amount of electricity as the natural gas power plant.

Further reading -

U.S. Department of Energy. Coal gasification offers one of the most versatile and clean ways to convert coal into electricity, hydrogen, and other valuable energy products.

Basin Electric, through its for-profit subsidiary, Dakota Gasification Company (Dakota Gas) owns and operates the Great Plains Synfuels Plant. The Synfuels Plant is the only commercial-scale coal gasification plant in the U.S. that manufactures natural gas. It is located five miles northwest of Beulah, North Dakota.

The Coal Can Do That article "Coal-to-Gas is Off-the-Shelf Energy Solution" from February 2009 by Dr. Frank Clemente.
Posted by Askgerbil at 7:15 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Coal - them and us or teamwork

Research in a number of fields may make new nuclear energy technology available with little warning.
Research and development of new applications for coal in petrochemical industries in parallel with reducing reliance on coal for energy can avoid any loss of jobs and State government mining royalties. If the new applications increase the value of coal then the interest groups that rely on coal can share growing revenues, wages and royalties over the period in which cleaner energy sources gradually replace coal in the energy industry.

The development of a widely acceptable transition plan for the coal industry is a good investment for the future of the industry regardless of lobbying for clean energy. Research in a number of fields has the potential for breakthroughs that make new energy technology available with little warning.

Physicists add another element to table

Dani Cooper | ABC Science News | 2 May 2014

A new superheavy element looks set to be added to the periodic table with the help of Australian researchers.

"We've managed to find four atoms of the same element 117, that hopefully will be sufficient to allow it to be officially recognised and then named," says co-author Professor David Hinde, at the Australian National University.

He says the creation of element 117 "is at the absolute boundary of what is possible right now".

"That's why it's a triumph to create and identify even a few of these atoms."

Understanding the atom

The main benefit of the creation of these superheavy elements is to better understand nuclei.

"If we push beyond what is already known we can refine models and determine what are the proper physical descriptions of nuclei and the chemical properties of elements," says Hinde.


Nuclear energy technology is in its infancy.  Consider a breakthrough that commercialises an Accelerator Driven Reactor designed to smash radioactive waste nuclei into fragments which are scarce and high-valued isotopes - and produces energy as a by-product that can be distributed at no charge...

Professor Nanda Dasgupta - Nuclear Fusion: Quantum coherence and its consequences
Professor Nanda Dasgupta - Nuclear Fusion: Quantum coherence and its consequences
The budgets of State and Federal Governments rely heavily on mining exports. The Queensland budget in June 2013 forecast royalties from coal mining to be $11 billion over the next 4 years. Similarly the New South Wales (NSW) budget in June 2012 (the 2013 budget is to be released in a few days) shows the extent to which the NSW government budget relies on coal mining royalties.

Year Qld
($billions) 		NSW
($billions)
2012-13 $1.743 $1.878
2013-14 $2.125 $2.112
2014-15 $2.643 $2.363
2015-16 $2.961 $2.518
2016-17 $3.356 -

Employment relies too on coal mining. NSW reports that total employment in mining grew from 19,000 jobs in 2001 to 39,000 jobs ten years later in 2011. The Hunter region is most reliant on mining where jobs increased from 9,000 to 17,000 in the ten years from 2001 to 2011.

The interests of coal mining investors, the mining industry workforce and State governments are largely overlooked in lobbying to build a renewable energy industry. This lobbying is often narrowly focused on the goal of displacing fossil fuel use within Australia. Domestic use of fossil fuels is a fraction of production so this goal is wide of the mark needed to achieve a reduction in global emissions. It would however send a controversial marketing message: asking overseas customers to buy a product that Australia itself no longer uses.

There is no need to engage in a conflict between vested interests. Technology for a staged transition of energy sources can avoid loss of capital value of coal-fired power stations. See the article "Combining Technologies to Increase Usefulness and Value" for an example. Using solar/coal/gas/biomass fuel with the same gas turbine and generator minimises the capital expenditure for reliable power generation plants. An indirectly fired gas turbine can burn any fuel - even coal. The same turbine and generator can be driven by concentrated solar thermal energy - adjustable up to 100 percent coal as required for reliable power generation.

Research and development of new applications for coal in petrochemical industries in parallel with reducing reliance on coal for energy can avoid any loss of jobs and State government mining royalties. If the new applications increase the value of coal then the interest groups that rely on coal can share growing revenues, wages and royalties over the period in which cleaner energy sources gradually replace coal in the energy industry.

Related posts - 

Future Nuclear Power Reactors Must Be Safe

Driven nuclear reactions on minimum acceptable safety standards for nuclear technology.

Posted by Askgerbil at 5:46 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, April 6, 2013

Climate Science Debate - The End

Posted by Gerbilnow at 7:59 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, March 22, 2013

UK Carbon Price Floor - Budget 2013

Extracts from UK "Budget 2013 documents",
20 March 2013


Chapter 1 - Budget Report

- at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/188360/budget2013_chapter1.pdf.pdf

Support for private investment in infrastructure

(Chapter 1, page 35-36)

1.90 The Government is acting to give private investors the confidence to invest in the UK’s energy sector. From April 2013 the carbon price floor announced at Budget 2011 will come into effect, providing a clear and credible long-term signal to support investment in low carbon electricity generation.

1.91 The Energy Bill, currently making its passage through Parliament, will introduce Electricity Market Reform. By providing stable revenues for investors at a fixed level known as a strike price, Contracts for Difference, as set out in the Bill, will provide long-term certainty for investors in low carbon generation. This will lower the cost of capital and help developers secure the large upfront amounts of capital investment required. Support available for low carbon electricity investment through the Levy Control Framework up to 2020 will rise to £7.6 billion a year (in 2012 prices), more than triple the £2.35 billion available in 2012-13. Together with the Government’s Energy Bill and Gas Generation Strategy, published in 2012, this will provide the framework needed for new energy investment.

1.92 The Government intends to take forward two Carbon Capture and Storage projects to the detailed planning and design stage of the competition. This represents the next step in the £1 billion Carbon Capture and Storage commercialisation programme and follows a period of intensive commercial negotiations with a number of bidders. The Department for Energy and Climate Change will set out the details of the preferred bidders, next steps on these front end engineering and design studies, and the process to final investment decision.

Chapter 2 - Budget policy decisions

- at https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/188361/budget2013_chapter2.pdf.pdf

Carbon Taxes

(Chapter 2, page 85)

2.159 Climate change levy (CCL) rates – CCL rates will increase in line with RPI from 1 April 2014. (Finance Bill 2013)

2.160 Carbon price floor (CPF) rates – The Government will set 2015-16 carbon price support rates equivalent to £18.08 ($AUD33.83) per tonne of carbon dioxide in line with the carbon price floor set out at Budget 2011. The Government will continue to provide support to energy-intensive industries to compensate for the indirect cost of the CPF in 2015-16. Further details will be announced at the next spending round. (Finance Bill 2013)

Carbon Price Floor - Briefing Paper

- at www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05927.pdf

Fluctuations in the price of carbon in the form of EU ETS allowances have resulted in uncertainty for investors in low carbon technologies. This has contributed to a lower level of investment in these technologies, below what is required to meet UK carbon reduction and renewable targets.

To address this, the Coalition Government committed to introduce a floor price carbon and published a consultation on carbon price support in December 2010. Following this it announced in the March 2011 Budget that it would be introducing price support via the Climate Change Levy and fuel duty with a target price of £30 per tonne of carbon dioxide in 2020. The floor price will start at about £16 per tonne. At the time of the announcement the trading price was around £15 per tonne, but by January 2013 it had fallen to under £4.

Detailed proposals for the carbon price floor were published by HMRC in December 2012 as part of the draft Finance Bill 2013.

1 Background

1.1 The EU ETS

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) is a mandatory cap-and-trade scheme for carbon dioxide, which is central to the EU’s climate change target of reducing emissions by 20% by 2020. It sets a decreasing cap for emissions from energy intensive sectors, and allocates or auctions emissions allowances (EUAs) which can be traded on the open market. It is currently in Phase II, which imposes reductions of 6.8% compared to 2005 emissions.
...

1.2 Is the price of carbon too low?

Over allocation of permits in Phase I led to the price falling to only a few cents. The consensus is that an allowance price of at least €30 a tonne is needed to drive investment. For Phase II the price reached €29 in 2008. However prices have fallen significantly since and at the end of January 2013 were hovering around €4.

The response from the Commission has been to consider raising the emissions reduction target for 2020 from 20% to 30%. This has full support from the UK Government and most Member States, although it has so far been strongly resisted by Poland. The EU Commission has also proposed holding back future credits due for auction – or backloading – but there is opposition to this from the EU Parliament.
...

3 Coalition Position

The Coalition Agreement made the following commitments with regard to the EU ETS:
  • We will push for the EU to demonstrate leadership in tackling international climate change, including by supporting an increase in the EU emission reduction target to 30% by 2020.
  • We will introduce a floor price for carbon, and make efforts to persuade the EU to move towards full auctioning of ETS permits.
Further details on a floor price were provided in July 2010 in response to a written parliamentary question:
The creation of a floor for the carbon price is an important commitment in the Programme of Government. As announced in the Budget, the Government will publish proposals in the autumn to reform the climate change levy in order to provide more certainty and support to the carbon price. Further detail will be published as part of the consultation process.
...

4 Government Budget Announcement

The Government announced its decision in the March 2011 Budget:
Carbon price floor – The Government announces a floor price for carbon in the power sector from 1 April 2013 to target a price for carbon of £30 ($AUD56.13) per tonne of carbon dioxide in 2020. The floor will start at around £16 ($AUD29.94) per tonne of carbon dioxide and the carbon price support rates for 2013-14 will be equivalent to £4.94 per tonne. The Government intends to introduce relief for carbon capture and storage and combined heat and power (CHP), and remove an existing exemption in the climate change levy for electricity CHP plants supply indirectly to an energy consumer. Anti-avoidance provisions will be introduced to prevent forestalling with effect from 23 March 2011. (Finance Bill 2011)
The then Energy and Climate Change Secretary, Chris Huhne, welcomed the decision, together with the commitment in the Budget to a Green Investment Bank:
“There’s a clear, long term signal to energy investors in today’s Budget. A Green Investment Bank with substantially more capital and borrowing capacity and a stronger, more stable carbon price put investment in green energy technologies at the heart of the coalition’s strategy for sustainable, balanced economic growth.”

4.1 Costs and Benefits

The costs and benefits for a target price of £30 for 2020 were set out in the regulatory impact assessment. This concluded that the resource cost – investment in new technology – would be around £6.1bn for 2013-2030. Over the same period there would be a carbon saving of £7.2bn and savings due to improvement in air quality of £0.9bn. This results in a total benefit in net present value of £1.9bn.
Posted by Gerbilnow at 1:39 AM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, March 18, 2013

Carbon arithmetic

Arithmetic of a recipe the coal, shale gas and coal seam gas industries don't want you to know

  1. Combine coal and/or biomass containing 180 kilograms of carbon with 270 kilograms of water to produce 120 kilograms of methane and 330 kilograms of carbon dioxide. 
  2. Separate and store the 330 kilograms of carbon dioxide. 
  3. Compress or liquefy the 120 kilograms of methane to use as fuel in a compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicle or in a liquefied natural gas (LNG) vehicle, truck, train or ship. 
  4. Alternately use the 120 kilograms of methane as fuel in a gas power station to produce 1 megawatt-hour of electricity with emissions of just 330 kilograms of carbon dioxide. A carbon price of $23 per tonne of carbon dioxide emissions would add nearly 1 cent to the cost of each kilowatt-hour of electricity generated. 
Coincidentally, the 1 cent per kilowatt-hour for a carbon price is about the same amount saved because this recipe uses less coal to produce electricity than a coal power station.

IN SALAH

Industrial-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) in action

In Salah, an industrial-scale CCS project in Algeria has been in operation since 2004. More than three million tonnes of CO₂, separated during gas production, have been securely stored in a deep saline formation. BP, Sonatrach and Statoil, the project operators, aim to store a total of 17 million tonnes over the next 20 years. (Read more...)

Related posts

Posted by Gerbilnow at 5:02 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Coal seam gas up in smoke

BP calls for more informed debate on CSG

ABCNEWS PM with Mark Colvin. Sue Lannin reporting
Updated Mon Mar 4, 2013 7:37pm AEDT

The chief economist of international oil giant, BP, says there needs to more discussion about the implications of coal seam gas drilling and extraction. Christof Ruhl says the natural gas energy source is too plentiful and too precious not to use it.

Coal seam gas treated as a costly waste product

Gas Flaring - Disposing of natural gas keeps prices high
Gas Flaring - Disposing of natural gas keeps prices high
Twitter - Coal Seam Gas



Related link -
Investing on the Road to Global Financial Crisis II
Posted by Gerbilnow at 3:34 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, February 26, 2013

A Carbon Price Timetable

Updated Thursday, March 28, 2013

Date Step
17 Jul 2007 The Prime Minister, John Howard, today committed his government to introducing an emissions trading scheme.
Howard said the government would set a long-term emissions target in 2008.  Read more ...
08 Feb 2010 Malcolm Turnbull said an Australian emissions trading scheme, with a carbon price set by the market, would improve business investment certainty.
Market-based approaches have the potential to deliver least-cost abatement by providing incentives for firms to reduce emissions where this is cheapest, while allowing the continuation of emissions where they are most costly to reduce.
This ETS allows Australian businesses to make their own decisions as to how to reduce their emissions. Government sets the rules and, in particular, sets the cap on total emissions and then lets the market work out the most efficient and effective outcome. Schemes where bureaucrats and politicians pick technologies and winners, doling out billions of taxpayers’ dollars, neither are economically efficient nor will be environmentally effective. For those reasons, I will be voting in favour of this legislation. Read more ...
20 Aug 2010 JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.
It will be part of a bold series of reforms that include school funding, education and health.
In an election-eve interview with The Australian, the Prime Minister revealed she would view victory tomorrow as a mandate for a carbon price, provided the community was ready for this step.  Read more ...
15 Sep 2010 The chief executive of Australia’s biggest electricity and gas retailer, AGL, on Wednesday called for the prompt introduction of an emissions trading system restricted only to the power generation sector.
Read more ...
16 Sep 2010 BHP boss Marius Kloppers: It's time for carbon tax
Mr Kloppers's call for a carbon tax undermines the passionate objections of Tony Abbott to setting a price on carbon before there is a global consensus.
"We do believe that such a global initiative will eventually come and, when it does, Australia will need to have acted ahead of it to maintain its competitiveness," Mr Kloppers told a packed Australian British Chamber of Commerce lunch in Sydney.
Read more ...
15 Nov 2010 The Australian Government has asked the Productivity Commission to undertake a study on the effective carbon prices that result from emissions and energy reduction policies in place or committed in Australia and other key economies.
Read more ...
16 Feb 2011 A "HYBRID" model of a fixed carbon price leading to an emissions trading scheme is likely to be agreed by the multi-party climate committee on Friday as the foundation for a new greenhouse reduction policy.
Read more ...
24 Feb 2011 Australia will set a carbon price from July 1, 2012, as an interim measure until a full emissions trading scheme can be introduced ..., Prime Minister Julia Gillard says.
But Ms Gillard said no decision had yet been made on what the price would be, ...
"Every cent raised from pricing carbon will go to assisting households, helping businesses manage the transition and funding climate change programs," she said.
Read more ...
1 Mar 2011 TONY Abbott has vowed to scrap Labor's carbon tax and oppose emissions trading if he wins the next election.
However, he was undermined by former opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, who yesterday said he still supported an emissions trading scheme.
Read more ...
11 May 2011 THE energy retailer AGL has urged the Gillard government to stick to its July 2012 start date for putting a price on carbon.
Despite fears that a carbon price could dramatically force up household power bills, AGL said many of these claims were erroneous, and the impact of the price rises could be offset by the types of electricity efficiency schemes already in place in NSW, Victoria and SA.
Read more ...
20 Mar 2013 The UK Government is acting to give private investors the confidence to invest in the UK’s energy sector.
From April 2013 the carbon price floor announced at Budget 2011 will come into effect, providing a clear and credible long-term signal to support investment in low carbon electricity generation.
[The carbon price floor starts at £16 ($AUD23.30) per tonne and has a target price for carbon of £30 ($AUD43.75) per tonne of carbon dioxide in 2020.]
Read more ...
Posted by Gerbilnow at 8:37 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

Thursday, January 10, 2013

Action on climate change now agreed

The United States coal industry, the Environment Protection Agency (the EPA) and climate change sceptic Fred Singer have finally arrived at a consensus on energy generation technology that dramatically reduces carbon dioxide emissions.

The contested issue of what contribution carbon dioxide emissions make to climate change was important when climate change sceptics and deniers were paralyzed with fear that low emission energy generation would result in poverty and starvation. With that alarmist outcome put to rest, the heat has gone from the debate.




The crucial change is the long-awaited consensus on action that lowers carbon dioxide emissions. The question of whether this action will influence climate change or not is a different matter. As mentioned above, the heat and urgency has gone from this unresolved issue.

The following representatives in the climate change debate have each endorsed the same action to reduce carbon dioxide emissions of energy generation:

  • Dr S. Fred Singer - Climate Change Sceptic
  • The United States Coal Industry
  • The United States Environment Protection Agency (EPA)

Others have recognised the same action as an economical and profitable approach to reducing energy costs. The fact that carbon dioxide emissions are cut by up to 75 percent compared to coal-fired power generation is, for climate change deniers - an inconsequential side-effect. For others concerned by the risk of climate change - this is both an added bonus and a significant benefit:


S. Fred Singer, April 11, 2012

"Combined-cycle" gas power plants can reach efficiencies of 60% or more, compared to heat efficiencies of nuclear power plants of 35% or coal plants of 40%.

It gets even better than that. Gas-fired electricity generation is essentially non-polluting and user-friendly, and it can be placed in close proximity to wherever power is needed, making distributed generation economically feasible.

For example, a large apartment building of 1,000 units could use its own 10-megawatt power plant. But once installed, it becomes possible to consider co-generation, with the waste heat used for space heating, air-conditioning, hot water, laundry, and other process-heat applications -- and even desalination.

One can imagine energy efficiencies of as much as 80%, more than double what is achieved today. It would also simplify the problem of waste-heat disposal.

Cheap gas will encourage the petrochemical industry to invest $30 billion in new U.S. plants over the next five years, according to Chevron-Phillips Chemical Co. Plastics producers will get a double-boost -- from cheaper feedstock gas, the raw material for their product, and lower electricity costs. ...

So what needs to be done? The first step is to have a White House that strongly believes in the need for low-cost energy to promote economic growth, increase prosperity, and fight poverty. Electricity costs should "skyrocket" downward, not upward.

The United States Coal Industry

Coal-to-Gas is an Off-the-Shelf Energy Solution, by Frank Clemente.

Update 17 March 2014
The coal lobby has removed the web pages for "Coal Can Do That".
A cached copy of this article by Frank Clemente is available from Google - as it existed on 23 February 2014 - Coal-to-Gas is an Off-the-Shelf Energy Solution

Update 2 April 2014
The coal lobby has removed the cached copy of the web pages for "Coal Can Do That". You may still read a copy of the "Coal Can Do That" article "Coal-to-Gas is Off-the-Shelf Energy Solution" from February 2009 by Dr. Frank Clemente.


Substitute natural gas (SNG), the product of a coal-to-gas process, is an established technology that has been around for a century and is currently in use throughout the world.

Substitute natural gas technology produces pipeline quality natural gas equivalents that can be used to fuel power plants, heat homes and manufacture a wide range of goods.

It removes 95% of the mercury and virtually 100% of the sulfur. The captured sulfur can be used to make fertilizer.

It provides fuel for the hundreds of natural gas power plants, ...boosts the economy of local communities and provides well paying jobs. A planned Muhlenberg County substitute natural gas state-of-the-art facility in Kentucky, for example, will create 1,200 construction jobs for four years, 500 permanent jobs and pump over $100 million into the economy of host Muhlenberg County and surrounding communities.

The United States Environment Protection Agency (the EPA)

On Tuesday, March 27 2012, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced new performance standards limiting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. The standard, which applies only to new power plants, limits CO2 emissions to 1,000 lbs (454 kilograms) per megawatt-hour (kg CO2/MWh).

The proposed rule is significant because it would be the first explicit limit on CO2 emissions in the United States. It effectively brings to an end new construction of conventional coal-fired power plants, which cannot meet the standard.

Typically, new coal plants generate about 1,800 lb (815 kg) CO2/MWh (or between 1,600 to 1,900 lb (725 to 860 kg) CO2/MWh). This means any new coal plants will have to adopt new technologies to reduce emissions, namely carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Natural gas plants, on the other hand, emit around 800-850 lb (360-385 kg) CO2/MWh, well within the standard.

In fact, the EPA based the emission limit on “the performance of widely used natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) technology” and predicts that NGCC will be the predominant choice in new fossil-fuel powered electricity generation.
Posted by Gerbilnow at 4:56 PM 0 comments
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)