The more I read George Monbiot these days, the more I think he’s descending, morphing into a reactionary waxwork automaton of his former radical, analytical, reasonable self. His recent web log posting on the Guardian Eco site hasn’t attracted many comments, compared to some articles of yore, but people seem to think, judging by Twitter chatter that getting equal numbers of critics from anti- and pro-nuclear commentators means that he is beating a middle-of-the-road and reasonable track through the thorny-hedged path to lower carbon energy. Just setting people up for a fight doesn’t appear to me to be making genuine headway. Seems to be more about ratings. And anyway, there are a number of assumptions and assertions he makes I simply cannot agree with. And here is a brief and non-complete run down.
Category: Nuclear Nuisance
George Monbiot in his new role as an apologist for the twice-bailed-out-of-insolvency British Nuclear Power industry, has now taken the Thorium bait, quite probably the most well-funded piece of astroturfing propaganda in existence :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/09/coalition-greatest-threat-to-environment
“This ‘greenest government ever’ is the greatest threat yet to our environment : The coalition is preparing to bin Britain’s climate change targets. After all, ministers have corporate sponsors to take care of : George Monbiot, guardian.co.uk, Monday 9 May 2011”
“…we should start considering other options for decarbonising the electricity supply: especially new nuclear technologies such as thorium, integral fast reactors or travelling wave reactors…”
“New”, George, “new” ? The only thing that’s “new” is the desperate rush to try Thorium power out, now that there are doubts about “classic” nuclear reactor design. Here’s what James Birkin has to say over at the Claverton forum, where they have real energy experts discussing Thorium reactors :-
[ UPDATE : E-MAIL FROM THE COMMITTEE ON CLIMATE CHANGE POINTS TO THE SECOND DOCUMENT – AND IT’S DEFINITELY A FUDGE ON “CAPEX” – SEE PAGE viii FOR EXAMPLE ]
Today’s publication of the UK Government Committee on Climate Change’s “The Renewable Energy Review” report seems to me to contain some fudge on the cost of nuclear power.
Almost everybody agrees that the current cost of generating nuclear power from existing reactors and plant is reasonable. There are questions about how much, exactly, it’s going to cost to decommission ageing reactors as they become dangerous, and there are also questions about how much it’s really, really going to cost to safely “dispose” of the radioactive waste from over 50 years of nuclear electrical generation. Even so, the operations and maintenance costs, the “O&M” costs of keeping nuclear power stations ticking over is fairly reasonable – unless there are unplanned “outages”, or radioactive accidents, or problems with the price of uranium fuel…happily, these added burdens can be kept off the balance sheets for the most part.
However, it is in projecting the real costs of new nuclear power, from shiny, spanking, new glistening, glowing concrete reactors, that deep and discomforting questions arise, and the CCC report, I think, I’m sorry to say, fudges the issue.
The nuclear energy industry has had another heady week of high drama and common failings, much to the chagrin of its ideologically fundamentalist backers. Let’s review a few of the headlines…
Ban Ki-Moon says we must expect more nuclear power accidents :-
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/21/un-chief-ban-ki-moon-nuclear-disasters_n_851967.html
Tritium leak at Daya :-
https://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/china/2011-04/22/c_13841779.htm
Georgia unplanned idling :-
https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/22/us-georgia-nuclear-shutdown-idUSTRE73L3FV20110422
https://edition.cnn.com/2011/US/04/22/georgia.nuclear.plant/?hpt=T2
Sellafield leak :-
https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/business/serious-nuclear-leak-at-sellafield-under-investigation-1.830038?referrerPath=home
Leaks in UK – from a leaked report :-
https://www.presstv.ir/detail/175974.html
https://www.metro.co.uk/news/861486-britain-sees-three-radiation-spills-at-nuclear-plants
Leak at Torness :-
https://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Torness-probe-after-radioactive-water.6756476.jp
High radiation near Ohio plant :-
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/morning_call/2011/04/high-radiation-found-at-ohio-nuclear.html
Pushing old plant for all it’s worth :-
https://www.bellinghamherald.com/2011/04/27/1987823/us-nuclear-plants-push-up-output.html
Questions about Indian Point :-
https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/idUS381697982020110502
Questions about re-licensing Pilgrim :-
https://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9N01I482.htm
Weeds growing in the outflow at Salem :-
https://www.abc27.com/Global/story.asp?S=14558314
https://www.nj.com/salem/index.ssf/2011/04/salem_1_nuclear_reactor_shut_d_1.html
Oops ! at Cooper Nuclear Station :-
https://www.kvnonews.com/2011/05/complications-as-cooper-nuclear-station-refuels/
Safe and smart ? Fire caused by an electrical fault at Trawsfynydd, in Wales :-
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2011/05/06/workers-evacuated-at-former-nuclear-power-station-91466-28646360/
Hamaoka to close due to earthquake risk :-
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/06_31.html
[ UPDATE : Further embarrassing TEPCO revelations and Russia’s Medvedev calls for new world safety rules. ]
Twenty-five years ago today, Reactor Four at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant ruptured, and explosions sent highly toxic and radioactive material up into the atmosphere.
We still live in the fallout plume of Chernobyl, a shadow that haunts us with future risk if the new Shelter Implementation Plan programme is not financed :-
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/features/chernobyl-15/shelter-fund.pdf
In the light of the Fukushima Dai-ichi Multiple Nuclear Accident in Japan, and the setting of an official exclusion zone, it is important to re-consider whether the low-risk-of-high-damage nuclear power technology should continue to be used in action taken against low-risk-of-high-damage Climate Change.
Governments and other institutions have been checking and re-checking nuclear power facilities and holding talks :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/15/european-union-stress-test-nuclear
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/15/european-union-stress-test-nuclear
https://www.dnaindia.com/mumbai/report_nuclear-power-the-missing-safety-audits_1536223
https://www.newschannel9.com/news/nuclear-1000446-commission-watts.html
https://www.inewsone.com/2011/04/22/france-to-check-security-of-n-plants/45173
The central lesson of both Chernobyl and Fukushima is that over time, engineering systems degrade, constructions rust and crumble, human operations become slack, and small chances can add up to have big consequences.
Public information has been created to help the newsreading public get to grips with the new reality of nuclear power. We cannot rely on nuclear power. Nuclear power stations break down, sometimes without warning. Nuclear power always poses a risk. Sometimes there are spills, leaks and emissions of dangerous gas – sometimes there are fires or explosions – and there is always the danger that somebody might misuse the fuel or waste :-
https://www.physorg.com/news/2011-04-google-earth-populations-nuclear.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-13159407
The Japanese Government and nuclear power industry did not respond to the warnings issued in 2007 in Japan after an earthquake caused a radioactive leak at a nuclear power plant :-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/8392730/Japan-nuclear-crisis-tsunami-study-showed-Fukushima-plant-was-at-risk.html
https://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2007/2007-07-16-04.html
Neither do they appear to have responded adequately to warnings of cracks in reactors, which have been known about for a long time. It is possible that reactor cracking, or other neutron damage, may have played a part in the release of radioactive chemicals still ongoing at Fukushima Dai-ichi. Only careful study will confirm or deny this, but engineers may not be able to get close enough to find out for some time as the radiation levels are so high :-
https://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/japan-nuclear-reactors-coverup-of-cracked-reactors-2002/
https://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/news/Blogs/nuclear-reaction/hamaoka-reading-the-news-and-things-to-come/blog/11303
https://weblog.greenpeace.org/nuclear-reaction/2010/04/nuclear_history_repeating.html
https://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-2195746/METI-warns-TEPCO-over-damage.html
https://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/latimes/
https://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?itemid=845&catid=23&subcatid=152
Can the United Kingdom now listen to warnings about cracked nuclear power reactors at home ? :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/dec/02/energy.nuclearindustry
“Cracked reactors may force closure of nuclear plants : Terry Macalister : The Guardian, Thursday 2 December 2004”
https://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2006/jul/05/energy.frontpagenews
“Documents reveal hidden fears over Britain’s nuclear plants : Unexplained cracks in reactor cores increase likelihood of accident, say government inspectors : John Vidal and Ian Sample, The Guardian, Wednesday 5 July 2006”
https://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/jul/06/nuclear.freedomofinformation?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
“More checks on reactors ordered after cracks found : John Vidal and Ian Sample, The Guardian, Thursday 6 July 2006”
https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5149650.stm
It is being admitted that not enough is known about the effects of radioactive fallout from nuclear power plant accidents. Let us only hope that our governments feel it necessary to spend the money to find out :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/26/chernobyl-lessons-missed-research-gaps
If we take TEPCO at their word, either Units 1, 2, 3 emitted Chernobyl-scale radioactive Iodine gas on explosion (that somehow fell through the roof of Unit 4), or there’s been a fission reaction in Unit 4 fuel pond – neither of which is an entertaining, uplifting prospect.
Peter Sinclair at Climate Crocks is keeping tabs on all things Fukushima :-
What have we learned about Nuclear Power in the last month or so ?
That freak weather events can knock out plants :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/18/us-tornadoes-shutdown-nuclear-reactors
That, even if the weather stays clement, that Nuclear Power plants can experience unplanned outage :-
https://www.nuclearcounterfeit.com/?p=4181
https://www.xe.com/news/2011-01-24%2012:56:00.0/1655653.htm
https://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Environment/TrendElectricity
Outside the usual political and media circles, questions are being asked. Why has the United Nations sanctioned military engagement in Libya in the form of UN Security Council Resolution 1973 ? Why the heavy firepower here, in Libya, when the ostensible rationale for intervention was only to implement a No-Fly Zone ? Why not gloibal military action elsewhere in the Middle East North Africa (MENA) arena where there are other despots making life unpleasant or endable for their citizens ?
I present to you two possible futures for Libya, both of which will require extensive cooperation with foreign corporate and political players, something that Muammar Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi (or Qaddafi) threatens, or rather, depending on various news reports, “threatened”.
1. The Dash for African and Arabic Natural Gas (and Oil)
In a carbon-constrained world Natural Gas is a boon – it has roughly half the carbon dioxide emissions of coal when burned to produce steam to generate electricity. Any country that’s got Natural Gas, especially good quality Natural Gas that doesn’t have to be hydraulically “fractured” from rock strata, is a country we will learn to love and trade on significantly generous terms with.
There has been extensive surveying of Libya, and the whole of North Africa’s Maghreb region, including the type of offshore seismic surveying that found extensive gas fields in the Eastern Mediterranean that Israel is now laying claim to (and preventing Gaza from exploiting). This has led to quite a lot of excitement in the fossil fuel energy industry, so, reading between the lines of the conference agendas, there is high dollar value under Libya’s maritime territory :-
https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/gsl/site/GSL/lang/en/page7792.html
https://www.geolibya.org/evdetails.asp?Myval=36
In addition to Natural Gas there may well be high levels of top quality oil – and keeping up the flow of crude oil, as we all know, is crucial to the health of the world’s economy. Threats of re-nationalising the Libyan fossil fuel resources therefore caused corporate shock :-
https://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/67d1d02a-5314-11e0-86e6-00144feab49a.html#axzz1HKdP1z5V
“Oil companies fear nationalisation in Libya : By Sylvia Pfeifer and Javier Blas in London : Published: March 20 2011 : Western oil companies operating in Libya have privately warned that their operations in the country may be nationalised if Colonel Muammer Gaddafi’s regime prevails. Executives, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the rapidly moving situation, believe their companies could be targeted, especially if their home countries are taking part in air strikes against Mr Gaddafi. Allied forces from France, the UK and the US on Saturday unleashed a series of strikes against military targets in Libya. “It is certainly a concern. There are good reserves there,” said one executive at a western oil company with operations in Libya. “We have lost some of our production [because all operations have stopped] but our bigger concern is what will happen to the exploratory work as that gives you a future rather than the immediate impact,” he added. Most of the world’s large international oil companies have producing assets in Libya, including Spain’s Repsol, France’s Total, and Italy’s Eni, which is the largest single investor there. Germany’s Winstershall – a unit of BASF – and OMV of Austria are also present. The country is the world’s 12th largest oil exporter, and the escalating violence there has triggered a jump in prices to nearly $120 a barrel. More than half of Libya’s oil was exported to Italy, Germany and France last year…”
BP had to evacuate its staff, and extend a favour to some British citizens, during the recent uprising :-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8344391/Libya-Britain-borrows-BP-jet-to-evacuate-citizens.html
Production in the country has taken a hit due to the fighting, but order should soon be restored. Clearly, long-term stability in Libya, with unhindered, inexpensive access to the country’s oil and gas resources is an important part of the national security interests of many Western democracies.
2. Solar Libya
https://www.desertec.org/en/global-mission/milestones/
The DESERTEC project of the European Union seeks to roll out solar power in the desert sands of North Africa, and makes the promise of economic and social development of the countries that take part, although that dream has been questioned :-
Let’s face the facts here – massive new energy projects in North Africa will be financed and developed through large multinational, transnational corporations, companies who have contributed to the economic slavery of Africa for, let’s approximate here, centuries.
What guarantees can the Maghreb have that this is not a further land grab on Africa’s potential ?
In addition, the recent social and political volatility in the Middle East North Africa region could jeopardise the noble plans of the European Union to reach out in energy partnership.
Hang on. Wait a minute. Is the wave of uprisings across the Middle East and North Africa connected in any way to the interests of oil and gas companies who want Future #1 to prevail for the whole region, not just Libya ?
American companies have been so keen to sell nuclear electricity projects to Saudi Arabia and others around the Arabian Gulf – but has this been encouraged from the high-ups to keep the Arabs off the scent of Renewable Energy ? Forget nuclear power – it’s expensive and awkward. Iran only pursues civilian nuclear power to irritate the United States Government. A solar Arabia could give the Middle East and North Africa a second generation of being the energy princes of the world. I suspect they will go for this in a big way very shortly, uprisings or no uprisings. Why ? Two little words – Fukushima Daiichi.
So there we have it – two entirely probable, slightly competing, futures being mapped out for Libya by the big guns of NATO (a euphemism for the USA). If Libya is split into two countries, the fossil fuel Future #1 will be likely applied to East Libya, and the desert solar Future #2 will be foisted on West Libya.
Continued interference in the country is a certainty.
February 2011
“Premature Deterioration Detected in GE Hitachi Control Rod Blades at Nuclear Plants : Nuclear Street News Team Fri, Feb 18 2011 : GE Hitachi has discovered unexpected cracking and material distortion in some of the companies’ control-rod blades, according to a report made public Wednesday by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. GE Hitachi reported to the NRC that the problems could present a safety hazard, and the design life of the companies’ Marathon Blades may be reduced. Malfunction of control rods can limit operators’ ability to control the nuclear reaction within a reactor. “A recent inspection of near ‘end-of-life’ Marathon Control Rod Blades (CRB) at an international BWR/6 has revealed crack indications…”
“Report hints at problems with nuclear plant control rods at Monticello : Posted on: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 : Minneapolis-based Xcel Energy will replace four control rod blades at its Monticello Nuclear Power Plant next month after a major nuclear industry manufacturer reported a potential “substantial safety hazard” with control rods at more than two dozen nuclear reactors around the country. GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy sent the warning Tuesday to all the affected plants, including Monticello…The cracking and distortion could prevent the cross-shaped rod blades, which typically are 12 feet to 14 feet long, from inserting into the core when plant operators want to reduce power or shut down a plant, said Ken Riemer, chief of reactor programs for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regional office outside Chicago. “They may get stuck and not move in and out of the core,” he said…”
March 2011
https://minnetonka.patch.com/articles/minnesota-nuclear-reactor-safe
“Minnesota Nuclear Reactor—Safe : As a meltdown seems almost certain at a boiling water plant in Japan, Xcel Energy, which operates two similar plants in Minnesota, is watching—closely. By Mike Schoemer : March 14, 2011 : The situation is worsening at the three nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant in quake-ravaged Japan. At last estimates, Japan has evacuated more than 150,000 people from a 30-mile radius around the plant. Meanwhile, nuclear administrators and workers at the local Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, less than 40 miles from Minnetonka, are watching with vested interest. And an uneasy local public wonders, “Could it happen here?” The short answer is probably not – the two plants in this state aren’t anywhere near a major fault line and a tsunami risk is virtually nil. But the long answer to a deadly one-two punch scenario like the one that hit Japan is, simply, unknown…”
https://climateprogress.org/2011/03/17/nuclear-energy-reactors-safe-the-onion/
Meanwhile, the Daily Mail allows us to be concerned about the things that really, really matter :-
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1366875/How-Japan-crisis-affect-money.html
“How will Japan crisis affect your money?”
Everything seems a bit gloomy for financial whizzkids :-
https://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/16/us-japan-quake-idUSTRE72A0SS20110316?pageNumber=1
“Japan scrambles to avert nuclear disaster, global fears mount…A stream of gloomy warnings and reports on the Japan crisis from experts and officials around the world triggered something of a meltdown in U.S. markets on Wednesday, with the Japanese yen surging to a record high against the dollar and all three major stock indexes slumping on fears of slower worldwide growth. European markets fared similarly. Traders were glued to their screens, hitting the sell button every time officials gave ever bleaker assessments of the situation on the ground in Japan…”
Categories
Be Prepared Big Picture Conflict of Interest Corporate Pressure Disturbing Trends Economic Implosion Emissions Impossible Energy Change Energy Insecurity Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Environmental Howzat Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Growth Paradigm Incalculable Disaster Marine Gas Methane Madness Methane Management Neverending Disaster No Pressure Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Obamawatch Oil Change Peak Energy Peak Oil Political Nightmare Regulatory Ultimatum Resource Curse Social Change Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas
American Full Spectrum Dominance
The documentary evidence shows that America’s business interests often outweigh its political progress. Yet it’s perhaps more concerning that, increasingly, corporate America is at risk of damaging good environmental governance.
With all the talk of free markets in international trade, the Coalition Government in the United Kingdom has felt the pressure to open up the back door to American energy businesses, whose highly-paid sales representatives in slick suits want us to buy their dirty energy projects – just take a look at the upcoming UK Energy Bill and its proposals for Electricity Market Reform.
American companies seem poised to sweep in and take all our public non-subsidy “support” for building new nuclear power plants. Viewers of a sensitive political disposition should look away now as this is a Wikileak :-
The country that brought you the engineering industry that brought you the giant Gulf of Mexico giant oil spill now wants to bring you unsafe deepwater drilling in Britain’s Continental Shelf – and the UK’s new Energy Bill would let them do that without demonstrating any learning from the BP April 2010 fiasco :-
https://act.greenpeace.org.uk/ea-campaign/…
There’s lots of talk in the energy sector and the financial markets about the American shale gas miracle “gamechanger” and how it can be replicated in Europe and across the world, and not enough discussion about the environmental dangers :-
https://www.tyndall.ac.uk/shalegasreport
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12190810
It’s good to talk about local environmental damage from “unconventional” gas, but what’s not being discussed so widely is that these “new” resources of Natural Gas aren’t really very green, and neither are the “traditional” resources – in some cases they’re not much better than coal :-
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=climate-benefits-natural-gas-overstated
https://www.propublica.org/article/natural-gas-and-coal-pollution-gap-in-doubt
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/natural-gas-clean_n_813750.html
We know that the Americans always seek to protect the interests of American-owned businesses – and we know they do that for the best of intentions – to keep America wealthy (except it’s really only a few people in America that have any wealth, but anyway…)
Yet I think there should be a limit to how far we have to bend over backwards to accommodate their needs for economic recovery.
To export all their dirty energy technology to Europe is just not helpful, and I think we should say no, no, no.
4am Tuesday morning, the Sizewell B nuclear power plant is shut down due to engineering safety concerns.
7am Wednesday morning, anti-nuclear power protestors block the entrance to the power plant.
Coincidence ? Precautionary ?
Meanwhile, the nuclear power industry is trying to make the case that nuclear power can be flexible :-
https://www.nuclearinst-ygn.com/magazine.htm
“Volume 5, Issue 6 Contents:… Track 2 Article by Laurent Pouret, Nigel Buttery and Bill Nuttall ‘Is nuclear power inflexible?’-38 minutes…”
Theoretically, a nuclear reactor or electricity generator can be partly shut down relatively quickly, and relatively safely.
But is it really flexible in all respects ?
If a nuclear power generator has to “load follow”, and operate flexibly, the price of the power produced will be higher – because most of the costs of nuclear electricity generation are fixed over time.
For this reason, most nuclear reactors are run as “baseload” – kept in operation all the time.
In France they operate some of their nuclear power plants “flexibly”, but it’s not clear how expensive this makes the power – the nuclear electricity industry is financially supported by the government in France, although opinion varies as to how much :-
“All countries face similar issues related to accident risk, radioactive waste management, and plant financing. All have adopted a range of subsidies that attempt to make the new plants appear financially viable, though some countries, such as France and China, do not publish enough information to get a good handle on how big the public support really is…”
If the United Kingdom were to convince energy companies that investing in new nuclear power in the country would be financially advantageous for them, then would nuclear electricity prevent the development of genuinely flexible renewable energy systems ?
It has to be borne in mind that the currently proposed 10, no, 11, no, 8, well, however many new nuclear plants, are only a replacement programme for the nuclear power stations that must be decommissioned in the next 15 years due to safety concerns. They wouldn’t give us anything better than we have now, and sometimes, right now, generation management can be a mess if big generators fail suddenly :-
https://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/28/power.cuts
https://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/may/28/britishenergygroupbusiness
Now would be a great time to abandon the really-rather-inflexible-and-expensive nuclear power in favour of developing genuinely responsive constantly low-cost tidal, marine and wind resources in the UK.
A lot of people agree with this idea, it seems :-
https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/8816197.Nuclear_power_station_petition_hits_10_000_signatures/
“Nuclear power station petition hits 10,000 signatures : 9:20am Thursday 27th January 2011 : CAMPAIGNERS fighting plans for a new nuclear power station in Bradwell have got 10,000 people to sign a petition against the plans. The petition, led by West Mersea pressure group Banng (Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group), will be passed to MP Charles Hendry, minister for energy at the department of energy and climate change in London on Tuesday…”
The Coalition Government have made it clear that there will be no (overt) subsidies for Nuclear Power, although there’s a little loophole in their proposals for the Energy Bill :-
https://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/legislation/energybill/1014-energy-bill-2010-ia-green-deal.pdf
“Enabling investment in low carbon energy supplies… 26. The proposals in the Bill will amend the existing powers in the Energy Act 2008 that allow the Secretary of State to modify a nuclear operator’s Funded Decommissioning Programme. The proposed amendments will provide an enabling power that will allow the Secretary of State to enter into an agreement at the time a Funded Decommissioning Programme (FDP) is approved that will set out the manner in which he will exercise his powers to modify an FDP in accordance with the principle of securing prudent provision. The aim of this amendment is to ensure that there is an appropriate balance between the Secretary of State’s powers to protect the taxpayer and the operator’s need for clarity over how those powers will be exercised…”
There’s also a bit of a loophole in the Coalition Government’s Electricity Market Reform proposals :-
https://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Consultations/emr/1041-electricity-market-reform-condoc.pdf
See pages 4 to 8 – the “Executive Summary” – and remember, where you see the expression “low carbon technologies”, or “low carbon generation”, that concept includes nuclear power.
And Sizewell B ? Still offline :-
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sizwell_nuclear_power_station_still_offline_1_792548
Nuclear power plants. If we can’t rely on them, why do we want them ?
And if they’re not very safe, why don’t we focus on things that are ?
Categories
Big Picture Carbon Capture Carbon Commodities Carbon Taxatious Coal Hell Conflict of Interest Corporate Pressure Cost Effective Economic Implosion Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Fossilised Fuels Green Investment Green Power Growth Paradigm Low Carbon Life Major Shift Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Political Nightmare Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Wind of Fortune
Market Tinkering
The Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition Government in the United Kingdom have several competing interests to juggle when it comes to the electricity generation industry.
Any proposed tinkering in the electricity market will need to show it still promotes competition (even though new entrants will probably complain they can’t compete in auctions), even as it guarantees safe and stable power supplies, even as it needs to make sure consumers don’t get ripped off.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change have published a clearly-written consultation document on their proposals for an Electricity Market Reform (EMR), detailing various methods of intervening to ensure long-term objectives on carbon emissions and energy security :-
https://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/consultations/emr/emr.aspx
I’ve been reading some really helpful commentary on the system-wide effects of these proposals :-
https://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Consultations/emr/1043-emr-analysis-policy-options.pdf
https://www.parliamentarybrief.com/2011/01/thumbs-up-a-little-early-for-that-mr-huhne#all
So far, my conclusion is that the net effect of these proposals will be to make the electricity generators feel secure about future earnings.
I’m not convinced that anything I’ve read so far will help energy supply companies feel willing to leap the expensive investment hurdle to ensure the UK gets new low carbon power plants.
I’m not even sure if the carbon and power pricing described will deter companies from dirty power generation and direct them towards new low carbon investment.
When I happened on the levelised cost of power in the main DECC analysis document, I came to a very pragmatic conclusion :-
https://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/Consultations/emr/1041-electricity-market-reform-condoc.pdf
Figure 2 (see top) shows that FOAK (first of a kind) new nuclear reactor plant designs (which is what we are told we will be getting in the UK) are probably going to yield similar unit electricity price values to Onshore Wind Power and Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) plant using Natural Gas feedstock.
My question is : why do we need to intervene with the electricity market to incentivise low carbon generation if the cheapest technologies are the low carbon options anyway ? (Yes, I’ve deliberately forgotten to discuss Carbon Capture and Storage).
My second question is : are the financial instruments proposed for the electricity market simply a sop to the electricity generators to leverage investment in new and efficient low carbon power stations ? Come and invest in new power generation in Great Britain and see your earnings stable (or rising) !
And my third question is this : don’t the NIMBY campaigns against Onshore Wind Power realise their success means that the overall cost of electricity to the consumers will rise significantly as wind power has to move offshore ?
My conclusion is : it would be far cheaper simply to instruct the largely publicly owned banks to make investment finance available, but only for low carbon technologies and forget about trying to maintain the facade of a free market.
Power supply is virtually a monopoly – and the State is bound to maintain supply – DECC have even got proposals on the table in their main Energy Bill to buy up any power companies that fail…yet another bailout !
Categories
The Gamechanger
Gasland at the ICA London : 17 – 27 Jan, 4 – 6, 11 – 13, 16 – 17, 19, 26 – 27 Feb 2011
The public propaganda budget for most energy and mining companies is eensy weensy compared to the profits they can make by polluting and stealing.
Are you ready for another American energy myth ? Yes, the country with the energy production “community” that brought you the Gulf of Mexico spill disaster of April 2010, is now threatening groundwater pollution and seismic shocks at a county near you in the United Kingdom.
A glimpse of the public relations that have led up to this can be seen very easily by using an Internet Search Engine using an Internet Browser (like Google running on Google Chrome, for example), using the search term : “shale gas gamechanger”.
That little word “gamechanger” has been soaking through the business, engineering and financial press in relation to “unconventional” gas for at least six months. Everybody digests this word in connection with information touting the magical promise of virtually free gas in the rocks beneath our feet. And then they repeat the concept and this little sales word to others. It’s gone completely viral.
Roger Harrabin of the BBC (thanks, Roger) brings word that the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research has recommended a moratorium on shale gas operations until more science is known about the results of the engineering :-
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12190810
“…”We are aware that there have been reports from US of issues linked to some shale gas projects,” a spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) told BBC News. “However, we understand that these are only in a few cases and that Cuadrilla (the firm testing for shale gas in Lancashire) has made it clear that there is no likelihood of environmental damage and that it is applying technical expertise and exercising the utmost care as it takes drilling and testing forward.”…”
So who is this company “Cuadrilla” ?
It is an entity formed from one Australian engineering giant and one American financial giant, seeking to propagate the American way of life of developing “new” energy resources :-
“…Lucas announced that the Riverstone/Carlyle Global Energy and Power Funds, a group of energy-focused private equity funds managed by Riverstone Holdings LLC, has committed to subscribe US$58.0 million for equity in Cuadrilla Resources Holding Ltd, the holding company established by Lucas to hold its investment for unconventional hydrocarbons exploration and development in Europe.”
“Lucas was a founding shareholder in Cuadrilla and has supported the management team since the company’s inception. Lucas’ total investment as of today’s date amounts to A$52.4 million.
Cuadrilla has applied for, and in some cases been granted, exploration licences totalling in excess of 1.5 million acres in the UK, Holland, Spain and Poland. In addition, Cuadrilla has designed, overseen the manufacture of and delivered state of the art cementing and fracture stimulation equipment and is soon to take delivery of a DrillMec HH220 top drive rig.”
So, does this technology actually work safely ?
Nobody really knows, is the short answer.
https://www.tyndall.ac.uk/shalegasreport
“…Funded by the Cooperative, the Tyndall report demonstrates how the extraction of shale gas risks seriously contaminating ground and surface waters. In this regard alone, there should be a moratorium on shale gas development until a there is a much more thorough understanding of the extraction process…”
Why do we continue to have American companies imprinting their business models on the UK ? We have to have their “independent” nuclear deterrent, their behemoth nuclear reactor construction companies, their health insurance companies, their failed genetically modified crops, their privatised prison and school and health centre management policies, their tax concepts, their social control policies, even their zeal for state terrorism…sorry…”The War against Terror”. And nobody seeks to question why we have to copycat everything the Americans do, even when it goes badly wrong.
Why can’t we have a War against Error ?
We need a real “regime change” here – we need to say a big no to American energy policy. And that starts with asking a few questions about the way American companies do business.
Here’s just one example of the sort of practice that the people behind Cuadrilla get up to :-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlyle_Group
“In 2000, Carlyle entered into a joint venture with Riverstone Holdings, an energy and power focused private equity firm founded by former Goldman Sachs investment bankers. In March 2009, New York State and federal authorities began an investigation into payments made by Carlyle and Riverstone to placement agents allegedly made in exchange for investments from the New York State Common Retirement System, the state’s pension fund. It was alleged that these payments were in fact bribes or kickbacks, made to pension officials who have been under investigation by New York State Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo. In May 2009, Carlyle agreed to pay $20 million in a settlement with Cuomo and accepted changes to its fundraising practices.”
And you trust these people with the right motives when agreeing to finance shale gas exploitation in Europe ?
A. J. Lucas Group is the engineering partner in this enterprise :-
https://markets.ft.com/tearsheets/businessProfile.asp?s=AJL:ASX
“The Company’s Oil and Gas segment is engaged in the exploration for and commercialization of hydrocarbons in Australia, Canada, United States and Europe. As of June 30, 2010, the Company held 56.95% interest in Cuadrilla Resources Corporation Limited (Cuadrilla).”
Starting with Blackpool’s Pleasure Beach, they appear to want to dig up the whole of Lancashire :-
https://www.channel4.com/news/shale-gas-striking-gold-in-blackpool
“Mr Cornelius said Cuadrilla would begin the extraction process in early January and would hope to have its first flare – gas burning at the surface – by early February.”
“If successful, the find would be extremely significant given Britain’s dwindling energy resources and our increasing reliance on imported gas. Cuadrilla had previously said the amount of shale gas in the Bowland site could meet as much as 5 to 10 per cent of Britain’s energy resources.”
“Now, after the first samples have been analysed, the suspicion is that the Lancashire fields could hold a lot more.”
“Now one site has been explored, the drilling rig will be moved to another site on the Bowland Shale to assess the size of the gas field overall. If those explorations also prove successful, then Cuadrilla will look to sell the entire operation to a large exploration company, like Shell, to carry out the expensive and time-consuming production process.”
Somebody has to say no to this. That somebody could be you.
What does shale gas “fracking” do to land, peoples and communities ?
Come and find out :-
https://www.culturecritic.co.uk/competitions/win-a-pair-of-tickets-to-the-premiere-of-gasland/
“GASLAND : Opening 17 January 2011 : Winner – Special Jury Prize – Sundance Film Festival 2010 : Nominated – Grand Jury Prize – Sundance film Festival 2010 : A frightening documentary that follows director Josh Fox as he attempts to uncover the truth about Halliburton-developed procedures for drilling for natural gas (known as hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’). When Fox is offered $100,000 for drilling rights to land he owns in Pennsylvania, his subsequent cross-country investigative odyssey lands him in communities contaminated by chemical waste caused by ‘fracking’ (the residents of one town are able to light their drinking water on fire). Another in a long line of essential environmental documentaries – each of which seems to be more alarming and compelling than the last…”
Come along and watch your own hellish future if you are unlucky enough to sit on top of gas-bearing rock formations :-
https://www.ica.org.uk/?lid=27269
“Gasland
17 – 27 Jan, 4 – 6, 11 – 13, 16 – 17, 19, 26 – 27 Feb 2011
A frightening documentary that follows director Josh Fox as he attempts to uncover the truth about Halliburton-developed procedures for drilling for natural gas (known as hydraulic fracturing, or ‘fracking’). When Fox is offered $100,000 for drilling rights to land he owns in Pennsylvania, his subsequent cross-country investigative odyssey lands him in communities contaminated by chemical waste caused by ‘fracking’ (the residents of one town are able to light their drinking water on fire). Director Q&A plus panel discussion : After the premiere on 17 January there will be a discussion panel afterwards comprising the director Josh Fox, along with representatives from The Co-operative and WWF.”…”
Here’s just a few links to peoples groups opposed to the engineering of unconventional gas :-
https://nofracking.com/
https://durangoherald.com/article/20110116/NEWS01/701169903/-1/s
https://www.marcellusprotest.org/
https://www.atlantic.sierraclub.ca/en/we-are-fracking-out
https://dearsusquehanna.blogspot.com/2011/01/fracking-to-pollute-water-air.html
It’s time our authorities read between the lines and regulated this practice away from Europe.
If we had a sparsely populated continent with lots of unused land, then maybe it might be OK. But with the risks still fully unquantified, we should keep this engineering out of well-populated and ecologically sensitive areas, particularly areas with water courses and farmland.
Categories
Be Prepared British Sea Power Burning Money Carbon Army Climate Change Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Global Warming Green Investment Green Power No Pressure Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Optimistic Generation Peak Energy Petrolheads Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Social Change Technological Sideshow Toxic Hazard Wind of Fortune
The New Climate Alliance
Green jobs, green energy, greening communities.
Forget Nigel Lawson and his struggle to keep the British energy system in the privatised 1980s by denying the realities of Climate Change.
The lords (and sadly, some of the ladies) of this land want to stay rich from their shares in fossil fuels and mining. They’ll say anything to protect the value of their holdings.
But where’s your new North Sea Oil and Gas, Nigel ? Do you want to bankrupt this country by forcing us to ramp up our imports of energy as the North Sea production falls away ?
The chief executives of the “traditional” energy companies of these islands are just trying to keep themselves in a job when they decry wind power, biogas, marine energy projects.
No, Vincent de Rivaz of EdF, we don’t want expensive, inflexible and toxic Nuclear Power. No, Dorothy Thompson of Drax, we don’t want dirty coal continuing to heat up the world, poison fish and raise coughing kids. No, Rupert Soames of Aggreko, we must maintain the Renewable Energy obligations we have agreed at the European level, and raise the bar even higher, to protect the economy going into an uncertain future, by having homegrown energy.
We need an energy evolution in this country.
And so, what is needed is a social movement – involving ordinary, working people, unions, communities, academics, trained professionals from the engineering trades, local political activists and faith communities.
This is the emergence of Green Power.
Categories
Bad Science Bait & Switch Carbon Capture Carbon Commodities Carbon Taxatious Climate Change Climate Chaos Corporate Pressure Delay and Deny Disturbing Trends Divide & Rule Emissions Impossible Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Extreme Weather Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Genetic Muddyfixation Geogingerneering Global Singeing Global Warming Low Carbon Life Major Shift Media Money Sings No Pressure Non-Science Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Optimistic Generation Peak Emissions Peak Energy Peak Oil Political Nightmare Realistic Models Regulatory Ultimatum Science Rules Social Change The Data Unqualified Opinion
We Will Get To You
Video Credit : Brooklyn Space Program
Eventually we will reach you.
Scientists are proverbially poor at communication, but we will eventually be able to explain to you what is happening to the Earth in a way that you will understand.
You need to give some time to the data, to the arguments. You need to read the significant research papers, learn how to read graphs, learn the acronyms, abbreviations, technical terms.
You will need to be able to weigh in your mind the significance of probabilities, the risks of extremes, the trends, the changing patterns.
After a while, you will start to reappraise the evidence, and start looking into the data and see the conclusions for yourself.
You will begin to appreciate the strong line of reasoning, and come to be in awe of the minds of many who work on Climate Change.
I’ve become impressed by the body of scientific evidence, that’s why I will always be aligned with the Climate Change science community.
We’re not going anywhere. We’re here, and we’re right. There has already been significant change in the Earth’s climate due to humankind’s mining-to-burn activities, and the projections are for further, possibly very dangerous change.
The scientists know what the problems are, and what the engineering solutions are. Some companies/corporations, economists and politicans and sadly even some compromised “environmentalists” promote non-solutions like carbon pricing, Carbon Taxation, Carbon Trading, Carbon Capture (and Storage), GM Crops, Nuclear Power, geoengineering – but the academies of scientists are telling you they won’t work, or won’t solve all the problems.
What is needed is wholesale removal of Fossil Fuels from the global economy in order to prevent further deterioration and disruption in the global climatic conditions. Either BP, Shell, Chevron and ExxonMobil hang up their boots forever, or they need to embrace new clean energies (not Nuclear Power) to stay in business.
Oil, gas and coal depletion in the production facilities of those countries that are national players will mean that they will go bust, because a consistently high price for Fossil Fuels is not supportable, because the global economy is so Fossil Fuel-dependent currently. This is both a buyer’s market and a seller’s market, so the price will be governed by the operation of this two-sided cartel, not by the theories of “scarcity economics”.
Either Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, China, Venezuela and so on are on their way to extreme poverty, or they will embrace new clean energies (not Nuclear Power) to stay economically developed.
Meanwhile, the project of empirical scientific enquiry continues apace, and even though rich fossil fuel businesses are financing doubt, even though people with pension funds in mining pour scorn on Climate Change science, and even though the mainstream media can’t recognise uneducated propaganda when they meet it; you need to trust the intellectual community of Climate Change science researchers.
Stop listening to accusations of malpractice, dodgy data, weak methods, poor models. Do you really know what you are talking about when you pass judgement on the scientific community ? Who told you that scientists were wrong ? Can you really trust the people who tell you not to trust the scientific community ? Do you have the right or the authority to lay somebody else’s fabricated blame at the door of those whose whole lives are devoted to discovering the truth ?
Why don’t you do an integrity check on your sources, before replicating myths ?
Read the science journals and not the newspapers, is my advice.
And when it comes to the Internet, search wisely. You can’t believe every website you come across – there are some web loggers who are misled, and there are others seeking to mislead.
If you want to filter out the nonsense, try this :-
Categories
Bait & Switch Be Prepared Big Picture Carbon Capture Coal Hell Corporate Pressure Design Matters Direction of Travel Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Genetic Muddyfixation Low Carbon Life Major Shift Methane Management Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Peak Energy Peak Oil Petrolheads Renewable Resource Technological Sideshow Transport of Delight
Ride the Future
Video Found At : Energy Bulletin
The Earth keeps turning, the Sun keeps burning, and the future will look a lot different than today as we drag down Carbon Dioxide emissions “by hook or by crook”.
We have to be wary of possible “crooks”. There are still technology “snake oil salesmen” out there, trying to impose Genetically Modified crops on us, or Nuclear Power, or Carbon Capture and Storage (to justify the continued use of Coal), and using the vehicle of science to push their wares :-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/8048917/Climate-change-threatens-UK-harvest.html
“Climate change threatens UK harvest : Climate change could push up food prices by causing large-scale crop failures in Britain, the Met Office has warned. : By Louise Gray, Environment Correspondent : Published: 08 Oct 2010 : Rising temperatures could mean events such as the drought in Russia this summer, which pushed up grain prices, hit countries like the UK. But they said the worst effects of climate change could be limited by investment in better farming and the development of new drought resistant or heat tolerant crops. This could be done by aid money, breeding and new technologies like genetic modification (GM)…”
https://www.leeds.ac.uk/news/article/908/crop_failures_set_to_increase_under_climate_change
Look out for terms like “new crops”, “crop development” or “modified crops” :-
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101007092817.htm
https://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/3/034012/
See the use of the word “biotechnology” in the actual research paper :-
https://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/5/3/034012/pdf/1748-9326_5_3_034012.pdf
But, as everybody can probably guess, most farmers in the world will not be able to afford Genetically Modified crops, and anyway, nobody really yet knows if GM crops confer the benefits claimed – there is some evidence that “life scientists” don’t know the full range of effects on organisms from gene splicing.
Categories
Bad Science Bait & Switch Big Picture British Sea Power Climate Change Climate Chaos Cost Effective Design Matters Divide & Rule Energy Change Energy Revival Engineering Marvel Fossilised Fuels Global Warming Low Carbon Life Non-Science Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Public Relations Renewable Resource Science Rules Social Change Social Chaos Stirring Stuff The Data Unqualified Opinion Wasted Resource Wind of Fortune
Wind Power : Material Fatigues
Image Credit : Cape Cod Living
James Delingpole follows in a long line of commentators with zero engineering experience in pouring scorn on a technology that could quite possibly save our skins :-
I don’t know what he harbours in his heart against wonderful wind turbines, but he seems to be part of a movement who delight in their failure. Just ask the Internet to show you “exploding wind turbines”.
For example :-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKkTUY2slYQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkGXoE3RFZ8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOfHxINzGeo
Clearly, you need to be in full protective fatigues when battling this kind of bad press…in fact “fatigue” is exactly the right word to come back at Mr Delingpole’s cracked warning (of cracks in wind turbine bases).
Categories
Big Picture British Sea Power Carbon Capture Carbon Rationing Climate Change Divide & Rule Energy Change Energy Revival Fossilised Fuels Genetic Muddyfixation Geogingerneering Global Warming Growth Paradigm Low Carbon Life Major Shift Media Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Peace not War Peak Energy Political Nightmare Public Relations Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Social Change Stirring Stuff Technological Sideshow Unsolicited Advice & Guidance Wind of Fortune
Tu Me Manques, David Miliband
I don’t know about you, but I’m missing David Miliband from the political fish-eat-fish top table already.
If he were to ask me, which he won’t, but anyway, if he did, I would recommend that he starts reading up about Energy production and supply, over the next 18 months or so before he gets invited, acceptingly, back into the Shadow Cabinet of the UK Government.
If he were to spend his time on the train between South Shields and Westminster looking into energy security matters, into crustal petrogeology, the Middle East oil fields, Wind Power, solar and marine options, he could make a strong comeback into the limelight – as opposed to the “lemon” light he’s been cast into, thrust into, so far.
If he becomes acquainted with the ways and wiles of engineering and fossil fuels over the next few years, the viability of Renewable Energy solutions, the transport explosion phenomenon and how to control it, then he will be able to offer solid assistance to his younger brother Teddy – who appears to be mistakenly sold on the idea of new nuclear power.
And if Ed Miliband were to ask, (again, which he won’t), I’d say – atomic energy cannot save us; carbon capture technology cannot save us; algae biodiesel can only trickle, even Frankenstein GM algae biodiesel; Peak Oil is almost definitely here; efficiency of use alone cannot save us. We have to go right out for a non-combustion, Renewable Energy future.
Categories
Advancing Africa Be Prepared Burning Money Carbon Capture Carbon Commodities Climate Change Coal Hell Corporate Pressure Cost Effective Emissions Impossible Financiers of the Apocalypse Global Warming Marvellous Wonderful Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Obamawatch Petrolheads Political Nightmare Regulatory Ultimatum Technological Sideshow Vote Loser
America Finally Might Actually Do Something
[ UPDATE : America might not actually, finally, do something – check the resistance dinosaurs. ]
We have waited long enough for serious action States-side on Global Warming.
The bankers (apparently largely Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan with lashings of Tony Blair) had their chance to talk up the idea of Carbon Trading. What a dead duck that turned out to be !
Carbon Taxation looks like it’s a non-starter with the global economy being a whisker from utter, utter, collapse.
The Clean Development Mechanism isn’t.
(Plus, the CDM hasn’t helped those it was principally promoted to help – Africa).
The global Biofuels targets are reducing rainforest to logpiles.
The Coal Kings have been pushing the idea of Carbon Capture and Storage for well over fifteen years and persuaded…no one.
The nightwalkers from the dark, radioactive side are still scaring people and luring them at the same time. If Iran wanting Nuclear Power was tricky enough, now Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait want it too, and I don’t expect the international dialogue tightrope act to get any easier.
The Congress and the Senate have seen filibuster and deal-breaking and lobbyist handshakes in dark corridors and reneging in bars.
But, at long last, it seems like Barack Obama is going to do what he hinted at, and regulate the bottom line out of Carbon Dioxide emissions, regardless of whether there’s any elected representatives passing bills :-
Categories
Big Picture British Sea Power Carbon Capture Coal Hell Energy Revival Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Low Carbon Life Marine Gas Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Peak Energy Peak Oil Political Nightmare Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Solar Sunrise Tarred Sands Technological Sideshow Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas Wind of Fortune
What Germany Says, Germany Means
Unlike the United Kingdom, where political sensibility can quash the most logical enactment of energy policy, plans for progress voiced so tentatively you can bearly feel a ripple, or hear it over the whispering swoosh of a new wind turbine blade, over in Deutschland, what they say, they intend to happen, and they’re making serious proposals about how that’s going to be done :-
https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,716221,00.html
“09/07/2010 : Green Visions : Merkel’s Masterplan for a German Energy Revolution : By Stefan Schultz : Giant windparks, insulated buildings, electric cars and a European supergrid: the German government on Monday unveiled an ambitious but vague blueprint to launch a new era of green energy for Europe’s largest economy. SPIEGEL ONLINE has analyzed the plans…”
It appears to be time to wave bye-bye to German coal, incidentally, even as a strong commitment to renewable, sustainable energy is put on the table.
I wish the British Government could take a long hard look at themselves in the mirror of the future and realise what a bunch of dithering duffers they appear to be.
What we need is a proper Energy Policy, chaps, and since you’re in the hot seat you better come up with it. Elected or not, our ministers and officials need to get up out of their deep leather chairs, extinguish their pipes, don their working breeches and get digging for Britain, and I don’t mean Shale Gas or Old Coal.
Categories
Advertise Freely Bait & Switch Be Prepared Big Picture British Sea Power Burning Money Carbon Capture Climate Change Coal Hell Corporate Pressure Energy Revival Environmental Howzat Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Global Warming Growth Paradigm Incalculable Disaster Low Carbon Life Marine Gas Media Meltdown Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Peak Energy Peak Oil Petrolheads Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Public Relations Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Resource Curse Solar Sunrise Tarred Sands Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas Wind of Fortune
Climate Weak
An e-mail trail with a certain amount of political content…
from: Kate Shepherd
date: Tue, Aug 10, 2010
subject: Climate Week
Hello Jo
It was lovely to speak with you today about Climate Week and I’d be grateful if you could pass on the information to the rest of your team.
Climate Week, 21st – 27th March 2011, is a new national occasion on climate change, backed by the Prime Minister, Al Gore and Kofi Annan. During Climate Week, thousands of events will be run by organisations from every part of society to highlight the positive steps being taken to help prevent climate change.
I have attached a document for further information, the document includes a list of supporters of Climate Week, which range from every part of society: from the Chief Fire Officers Association to the Women’s Institute, the Girl Guiding UK to several Regional Development Agencies.
Categories
Be Prepared Big Picture British Sea Power Burning Money Climate Change Coal Hell Corporate Pressure Cost Effective Delay and Deny Disturbing Trends Emissions Impossible Energy Revival Financiers of the Apocalypse Global Singeing Global Warming Growth Paradigm Low Carbon Life Marine Gas Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Peace not War Peak Energy Peak Oil Petrolheads Political Nightmare Protest & Survive Public Relations Regulatory Ultimatum Resource Curse Social Change Solar Sunrise Tarred Sands The Data Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas Wind of Fortune
Peak Everything
From a conversation with the Claverton Energy Research Group over the leak of a German military study into Peak Oil :-
https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,715138,00.html
“09/01/2010 : ‘Peak Oil’ and the German Government : Military Study Warns of a Potentially Drastic Oil Crisis : By Stefan Schultz…”
Hi Clavertonians,
My view on Peak Oil is that it is the tip of the iceberg – and I know that’s a totally inappropriate metaphor.
The art of petrogeology dictates that right on the heels of Peak Oil is Peak Natural Gas, and there is strong evidence for Peak Coal. In the US for example, I understand there is very little good hard anthracite left.
My position is that – since the “conventional” Fossil Fuels are depleting, there are strong moves towards the “unconventionals”, the shale gas, the deepwater oil, the smoky “half peat”, the Lake Baikal hydrates, the frozen subsea wastes of the Arctic [don’t forget the Tar Sands !] and so on. People argue for “stop-gap” energy resources, but they carry with them huge risks not only to the Climate, but also the the Economy with the step-change in EROI/EROEI [Energy Return on Energy Invested – that is – how much energy do you need as input to get energy as output] and the “clean-up” costs.
My take on this is that pretending that Peak Conventionals doesn’t exist leaves a veil in front of most peoples’ minds – they believe in the Power of Technology to supply all their Fossil Fuel needs, now and into the future – it’s just that the actual location and form and dirtiness of these new resources will be different than in the past.
And here’s the rub – we need to encourage people to think about the “alternatives”, or rather, the “solutions”.
The only way forward is Renewable, Sustainable Energy resources, because of Peak Oil, Peak Natural Gas and so on, and if people do not learn about that, they will not understand the privation for most people that will surely come with Peak Conventionals.
Categories
Be Prepared Big Picture Burning Money Climate Change Coal Hell Corporate Pressure Emissions Impossible Energy Revival Environmental Howzat Financiers of the Apocalypse Fossilised Fuels Global Warming Incalculable Disaster Marine Gas Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Oil Change Peace not War Peak Energy Peak Oil Petrolheads Protest & Survive Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Resource Curse Sandstorm Social Change Tarred Sands Toxic Hazard Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas
Rethink Fossil Fuels
We all love the inputs, but what about the outputs ?
Fossil Fuels have been providing an easy life and easy pickings for the citizens and enterprises of the industrialised world for some time.
People love their jet-fuelled lives. One man will move one kilometre from his home to a restaurant in two and a half metric tonnes of steel and glass believing he is admired for his larger-than-car-sized car. He will wear sunshades, and oil-slicked hair (if he has any) and sport a tan from his recent holiday over the ocean. A life of glory and feeling good about himself.
But what about the emissions ? What, indeed, about the environmental devastation at the places the Fossil Fuels (and metal and glass) were mined and refined and manufactured ?
What do we leave behind ?
Categories
Bad Science Be Prepared Big Picture British Sea Power Burning Money Carbon Capture Climate Change Coal Hell Delay and Deny Divide & Rule Energy Revival Faithful God Fossilised Fuels Geogingerneering Global Singeing Global Warming Growth Paradigm Low Carbon Life Non-Science Nuclear Nuisance Nuclear Shambles Peak Energy Peak Oil Regulatory Ultimatum Renewable Resource Resource Curse Science Rules Screaming Panic Social Change Solar Sunrise Technological Sideshow The Data Unconventional Foul Unnatural Gas Wind of Fortune
Climate Change Denial, Everywhere
Here follows an extract of a conversation I have had with members of the Claverton Energy Research Forum, which I have cut-and-paste into a more easy-to-read fashion below the fold :-
As you can see, there are Climate Change sceptic-deniers everywhere, even in the most knowledgeable and respectable circles.
Countering Climate Change denial from so-called “sceptics” takes a lot of time and energy, and is a bump-in-the-road nuisance/irritation distraction from the main priority for human civilisation, which is how to stop being addicted to Fossil Fuels.
Video Credit : Journeyman Pictures
Big green energy news of the month : President Barack Obama of the United States of America has announced direct investment into solar :-
https://climateprogress.org/2010/07/04/obama-solar-pv-csp/
https://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/jul/04/obama-hands-solar-firms-2bn
Let there be light in the soul, and solar energy in the land.
This looks like a tipping point. Let’s flip some more trip switches in our personal networks and get the oil-producing bloc in the Middle East to see the value of going wind and solar (instead of expensive, risky Nuclear) :-
https://www.arabianbusiness.com/591358-qatar-awaits-new-solar-wind-tech-before-investment
https://www.gizmag.com/shams-1-concentrated-solar-power-plant/15389/picture/116110/
“The largest concentrated solar power (CSP) plant in the Middle East is to be built in Madinat Zayed, approximately 120 km (75 miles) southwest of Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). When it becomes operational in 2012, the plant, dubbed Shams 1, will feature some 6,300,000 square-feet of solar parabolic collectors, cover 741 acres of desert and will produce enough electricity to power 62,000 households.”
What ? That soon ?