EcoRadio

Category: Energy Matters

The twentieth century way of life has been made available, largely due to the miracle of cheap energy. The price of energy has been at record lows for the past century and a half.As oil becomes increasingly scarce, it is becoming obvious to everyone, that the rapid economic and industrial growth we have enjoyed for that time is not sustainable.Now, the hunt is on. For renewable sources of energy, for alternative sources of energy, for a way of life that is less dependent on cheap energy. 

  • Google-Powered Geothermal Drilling System Could Reduce Costs

     

    This method, previously used to fracture granite and marble for commercial use but effective only in surface or close-to-surface applications, is now being applied to deep-well geothermal drilling, but with water as the medium instead of air.

    Not only does the method save money by not using drill bits, which break or wear out, costing crews thousands of dollars and hours of time, but drilling is continuous and considerably faster – 30 feet per hour as compared to traditional drilling’s top speed of 10 feet per hour.

    The company at the forefront of this newly repurposed technology, Redwood City, California-based Potter Drilling, says that it intends to use the reinvented process to make drilling geothermal wells cheaper and more environmentally friendly. The technology can also be used, to equal advantage, in carbon sequestration, nuclear waste storage, and mining operations.

    Potter has already received funding from Google (Nasdaq:GOOG), the world’s best-known Internet search engine and online advertiser.

    For Google, it’s part of an overall investment of more than US$30 million in renewable energy announced in 2008, $10 million of that earmarked for geothermal alone and divided among three geothermal companies/projects: AltaRock Energy, Inc., $6.25 million, including whatever was spent for its now defunct initial geothermal project at the Geysers in California; Potter Drilling, $4 million, in two payments, to develop large scale Enhanced Geothermal Systems, or EGS; and Dallas, Texas-based Southern Methodist University Geothermal Lab, $489,521, to map and evaluate U.S. geothermal energy resources.

    More support will come from the U.S. Department of Energy, which has committed US$5 million to Potter’s initial drilling efforts in Raymond, California.

    There, in the past year and a half, the company has drilled holes ranging from one to four inches in diameter, 1,000 feet deep, to demonstrate the advantages of its hot-water spallation drilling method, which relies on the fact that rock types do not all expand the same amount when heated, resulting in stress and fracturing, the latter releasing the steam needed to power a geothermal energy system.

    Geothermal energy can also be developed from hot water – either liquid already in the ground, or surface water pumped in and heated by hot rock formations – but this form of geothermal typically produces less energy because of the lower temperatures involved. (Water becomes steam because of a material phase change at 100 degrees Celsius, or 212 degrees Fahrenheit).

    According to the Geothermal Energy Association, geothermal energy has the smallest land-use footprint of any power generation technology, including both traditional sources like coal and oil, and newer, renewable sources like solar and wind.

    It is also more reliable than solar and wind, and can be used for baseload electricity generation; every geothermal energy plant built in the last century is still in production, even though production values may have fallen as a result of poor construction or sealing (as is also the case with the BP Gulf oil disaster), or carbonate clogging.

    The single drawback to geothermal energy is the high cost of initial development, but if Potter Drilling has its way, that problem may be solved in the near future, leading to the sort of geothermal energy development that could power seven million American homes in the near term, and potentially almost the entire nation when EGS technology is perfected.

    Jeanne Roberts is a freelance writer on environment and sustainability issues. In her previous life, she worked as both a reporter and a communications specialist for a major public utility. Her most recent book, Green Your Home, approaches environmentalism from a consumer’s perspective.

    This article was originally published on the media outlet EnergyBoom and was reprinted with permission.

  • BP clashes with scientists over deep sea oil pollution

     

    BP’s chief executive, Tony Hayward, said it had no evidence of underwater oil clouds. “The oil is on the surface,” he said. “Oil has a specific gravity that’s about half that of water. It wants to get to the surface because of the difference in specific gravity.”

    Hayward’s assertion flies in the face of studies by scientists at universities in Florida, Georgia and Mississippi, among other institutions, who say they have detected huge underwater plumes of oil, including one 120 metres (400ft) deep about 50 miles from the destroyed rig.

    BP’s claim is likely only to further anger environmentalists and the White House, which has grown increasingly suspicious of the company’s claims to be frank and transparent on developments. The president’s environmental adviser and director of the Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy, Carol Browner, has accused BP of misstating the scale of the leak.

    “BP has a vested financial interest in downplaying the size of this,” she said on CBS television. “They will pay penalties at the end of the day, a per-barrel per-day penalty.”

    Ed Markey, chairman of the House of Representatives environment committee, has also accused BP of underplaying the scale of the disaster and suggested that it may have a criminal liability.

    “The fine that can be imposed upon them is based on how many barrels [pour in to the sea]. It could wind up in billions of dollars of fines,” said Markey. “They had a stake in low-balling the number right from the beginning. They were either lying or they were incompetent.”

    In the White House, under increasing criticism for not taking charge of the effort to stop the spill, some officials are saying they have been misled by the company or kept in the dark at key moments.

    The Politico website reported that the Obama team was incensed that the company failed to inform it for a day and a half after suspending the failed “top kill” operation to plug the spill using rubber tyres and mud.

    Obama is expected to hold his first meeting today with the leaders of an oil spill commission he established to make policy recommendations about US offshore oil drilling. The commission will be similar to those that looked into the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger in 1986 and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979.

    Also today, US attorney general Eric Holder will meet federal prosecutors and state attorneys general in New Orleans. It will be Holder’s first trip to survey the damage before what legal experts believe will be a criminal investigation into the disaster.

    The dispute between the administration and BP comes as the company readies its latest effort to contain the flow of oil in to the sea, following the failure of top kill. The new plan involves an intricate operation to cut the top off the damaged riser that brought oil to the surface of the destroyed rig. The intention is to create a flat surface to which to attach a valve that would divert the oil into a pipe and on to a ship.

    But slicing the top off the damaged pipe may result in oil flowing into the sea at a faster rate until the new valve is fitted. Even if successful, the operation would only limit, not entirely stop, oil from flowing into the sea. If this measure failed, BP’s best hope of halting the oil would remain the drilling of a relief well that would ease the pressure on the damaged one. But the US government has warned that the spill could continue into August.

    The attempts to stop the oil flow have been given added urgency by the start of the hurricane season tomorrow.

    Forecasters are predicting an unusually high number of storms over the next six months. If the oil is still spread across the sea, a hurricane is likely to disperse it over a much wider area and push it deeper into marshlands and other inland areas, making the environmental disaster even worse.

    The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting between eight and 14 hurricanes this season, with perhaps a similar number of smaller storms.

    The US military has ruled out taking charge of the operation to stem the flow of oil from the blown-out BP rig. The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, today said that military chiefs had looked at the available equipment and concluded that “the best technology in the world, with respect to that, exists in the oil industry”.

    A day earlier, the former US secretary of state, Colin Powell, said the military should step in because the crisis was now “beyond the capacity” of BP to stop.

  • Oil slick spotted off Florida coast

    Oil slick spotted off Florida coast

    • From correspondents in Pensacola Beach, Florida
    • From: AP
    • June 02, 2010 10:09AM

     

    AN oil sheen was confirmed about 15km off the Florida coast, and officials are saying it could hit the white sands of Pensacola Beach as soon as today (local time).

    Escambia County officials started putting out boom yesterday and making other plans for the arrival of the oil.

    Crude has already been reported along barrier islands in Alabama and Mississippi, and it has impacted some 200km of Louisiana coastline.

    Florida officials say their request for about $US150,000 ($180,636) from BP to buy sifting machines and a tractor to help remove oil from the beach’s famous white sands has lingered unanswered.

  • PM Kevin Rudd takes control of mining talks

     

    Related Coverage

    The report to the MCA forecasts that the tax would cause significant loss of value in investments and is “likely to result in mining companies deferring or cancelling Australian projects in the short to medium term”.

    The government’s political standing and Mr Rudd’s leadership support has been rocked during the month-long dispute over the new profits tax on mining. The latest Newspoll surveys show Labor’s primary vote at just 35 per cent and more people opposed to the new tax than supporting it.

    The MCA has run a series of advertisements accusing the government of misleading the public over the taxes miners pay and arguing the new tax would hurt all Australians. Wayne Swan has responded by calling the mining leaders liars or ignorant.

    Mr Rudd said yesterday in parliament that “the bottom line is they can pay more tax” and the government would not accept “propaganda by the MCA”.

    But the Prime Minister is preparing to meet individual mining leaders, who argue that the government’s process in introducing the tax has been faulty, that there has been insufficient consultation and that there should be detailed negotiations beyond the tax consultation panel headed by a deputy secretary of Treasury.

    The government is insisting the proposed 40 per cent tax rate is non-negotiable but is prepared to consider other major concessions on the tax threshold, loss provisions and the exemption of quarry products.

    “We believe this 40 per cent rate is right and we’ve said we will consult with the industry on detail and on implementation and on transition,” Mr Rudd said yesterday.

    “That’s the framework in which we’re having these consultations and negotiations, but what I do know about consultations with very big – very big – mining companies who sometimes hunt in packs is that it’s far better that these negotiations are conducted direct rather than through the media.”

    The Prime Minister also warned that the negotiations with the mining leaders would take a long time and that he refused to be held to any timetable in relation to the election, which is expected by October.

    “Anyone out there expecting that there’ll be some magic deal at midnight tomorrow night is wrong,” Mr Rudd said in reference to the MCA annual dinner in Parliament House tonight.

    “That’s not how it’s going to be. Furthermore, this is going to be quite a long and protracted negotiation over quite a long period of time. And there I speak of weeks, at least, if not beyond.

    “I wish to emphasise that the government remains fully committed to a resource super-profits tax.”

    Mr Rudd said the 40 per cent tax rate was fundamental, as was the commitment to be able to fund “other elements of tax reform as well”, such as small business and company tax cuts.

    The RSPT is forecast to raise $9 billion in 2013-14 and is essential to the government’s projections for tax cuts, low-income earners’ superannuation concessions and return to budget surplus.

    Tony Abbott said: “Mr Rudd’s great big new tax is not just something that’s going to impact on BHP and Rio. It’s going to impact on everyone who is doing something around his or her house.

    “Everything that comes out of the ground is subject to Mr Rudd’s great big new tax. That means your sand, your gravel, it means everything that goes into the steel, the concrete, the roof tiles, all of this is going to be subject to Mr Rudd’s great big new tax and this is a tax on everyone.”

    Resources Minister Martin Ferguson backed the Prime Minister’s claims saying: “Contrary to what the Leader of the Opposition is saying, this is not a tax on extraction. We should also not forget that the industry itself has argued for tax reform.

    “What we’re about is bedding down the detail and putting in place certainty, which ensures that we get a fair return for the Australian community for their resources during the good times but I also remind you that during the bad times there is also some relief for the mining industry.”

    The Treasurer said the government was not surprised that it was meeting “fierce resistance from some of the biggest companies in the country, and indeed, some of the biggest resource companies in the world”.

    “It is naive for anybody to expect that it would be different because they will have to pay a bit more tax,” Mr Swan said.

    47 comments on this story

  • Co-firing Biomass with Coal

     

    About half of the electricity in the United States is generated from coal. At the same time, the increasing focus on energy and climate change policy in the U.S. has introduced significant regulatory uncertainty in generation planning and operations. This uncertainty around where U.S. carbon policy is headed and when-along with the nature of modern utilities’ complex planning-requires a long-term, forward-looking strategy, one that fully integrates generation portfolio management with changes in demand behavior.

    An integrated asset and fuel optimization approach can help the energy industry create a robust strategy set that will stand the tests imposed by constantly changing regulatory requirements, market dynamics, evolving environmental policies and uncertainties regarding timing, funding levels and rate recovery mechanisms.

    Co-firing may indeed make sense, from cost and environmental perspectives, for many coal-based electricity producers. Co-firing makes use of existing power generation assets and infrastructure with the lowest cost of generation for renewable energy, while providing a means to mitigate the future cost of carbon. It offers renewable energy generation with low capital costs and takes advantage of the latest technologies and the high efficiencies of today’s coal power plants.

    Many national governments provide tax and financial incentives to encourage electric producers to adopt co-firing. In the U.S., where biomass is recognized as a renewable fuel, replacing coal fuel with biomass results in a substantial credit reduction in coal-based carbon dioxide emissions.

    Biomass co-firing has been used in Europe for over a decade. Full-scale commercial co-firing of at least 10 percent biomass-based on heat input-is common practice, with a wide variety of bio-fuels and co-firing configurations. The European biomass co-firing market has advanced to the point where the EU is implementing a new certification process for sustainably produced biomass for energy generation purposes. KEMA is assisting in establishing this biomass certification based on the chain of custody-from producer to processors to end-user.

    Often electricity producers opt to conduct trials first, to prove the viability, reliability, sustainability and cost-effectiveness of biomass co-firing in their plants. KEMA has been actively engaged in supporting biomass co-firing initiatives already underway in Europe for over a decade, and this technology has been demonstrated in many boiler types. The U.S. can leverage the experience gained in Europe to fast-track implementing biomass co-firing. Complete conversion to 100 percent biomass in a specific unit at multi-unit stations has already proven to be viable and sustainable in certain circumstances. The challenges in the U.S. are around reliable fuel supply and quality, a lack of incentives and a general reluctance by plant operations to introduce new fuels into existing boilers.

    We are seeing biomass co-firing on the rise in North America. KEMA has performed feasibility studies on co-firing for a number of large North American utilities looking to assess and quantify the risks, review fuel supply surety and obtain a detailed techno-economic assessment and conceptual design for co-firing of biomass in coal-fired plants. Utilities planning on co-firing between 5 and 10 percent biomass (by heat input) initially have also been interested in knowing what it takes to move towards a 100 percent fuel switch to biomass.

    In considering the full fuel switch, utilities are looking to ensure a mix of interrelated considerations, including minimal unit de-rating, no severe adverse operating conditions, no degradation of ash quality, no increase in emissions, compliance with regulation and legislation, broad initial fuel scope and competitive economics/favorable internal rate of return. By using proprietary co-firing control model software, we have been able to facilitate efficient and effective assessment process-providing utilities immediate quantitative insight into the risks associated with firing a mix of fossil and/or biomass fuels in existing coal-fired power plants along with specific guidance to optimize combustion.

    As co-firing biomass has become a recognized option in the U.S. electric generation market, biomass co-firing can be a real option in a utility’s portfolio-based approach to climate planning. We have worked with a number of U.S. and European utilities in defining their long-term carbon strategies, the majority of whom are asking to include biomass co-firing as a portfolio option within our sustainable integrated energy modeling tools being employed. This portfolio-based carbon planning process offers another avenue for utilities to assess the impact of biomass co-firing on profit and loss and on the balance sheet along with risk-based scenarios.

    Kevin Sullivan is senior vice president with KEMA Inc. and Ronald Meijer is managing principal Clean Fossil Power with KEMA Nederland B.V.

  • Integrating Solar: CSP and Gas Turbine Hybrids

     

    In a combined cycle plant, the high temperature exhaust gas from the turbine is passed through a heat recovery steam generator from which high-pressure steam is used in a steam turbine. Such installations are now operating at above 50% efficiency and the technology is well proven. In ISCC installations, additional thermal energy from the solar collector field is effectively injected into the heat recovery steam generator (HRSG) of a conventional combined cycle plant. This boosts steam production and consequently electrical output. It also potentially allows CSP to be easily integrated into conventional fossil-fired thermal plants at relatively low extra cost.

    Technology Requirements

    As a relatively mature technology with a proven track record, ISCC installations currently under development have utilized parabolic trough reflectors. However, while the technology is relatively straightforward, in order to install solar combined cycle hybrid plants, there are certain requirements associated with any such development, including a large site and suitable topography.

    (Left: Solar power can supplement steam production. Credit: Schott Solar)

    Obviously for any solar installation, the direct normal insolation should be as high as possible, plus there is also a requirement for cooling water as part of the condensing cycle of the thermal power island. A final, though fundamental, requirement is the availability of suitable electricity transmission infrastructure to convey the solar generated power to load centres.

    Given a suitable site, however, ISCC does offer some unique advantages for utilities and other power supply interests. Primarily, electricity from CSP technology is generated exactly like conventional electricity, except solar power is used to provide heat to the boiler instead of fossil fuels. CSP is also becoming increasingly suited to changing power demand characteristics. Largely due to the increasing use of air conditioning, in some regions peak electricity demand has been far greater during recent summers than the peak winter demand. And, CSP plants deliver their maximum output during these peak hours, potentially offering opportunities to sell into the more attractively priced spot market at such times. Furthermore, although the current generation of ISCC installations have not included thermal storage capacity, this technology does allowing CSP to extend its operational range.

    (Left: The power block and some of the solar collector field of the world’s first operational ISCC plant, Ain Beni Mathar in Morocco. Credit: Abener)

    Nor is the integration of solar thermal capacity limited to new-build gas-fired combined cycle installations. In August 2009 Abengoa Solar announced that it is to build the first CSP installation integrated with a coal-fired plant.

    Owned by Colorado-based US utility group Xcel Energy, the demonstration project is planned to increase output at the Cameo coal-fired plant, near Grand Junction, Colorado, by 4 MW.

    ‘If this demonstration works, we may be able to implement this type of technological advance in other coal-fired power plants to help further reduce carbon dioxide emissions in Colorado and possibly other areas of our service territory’, said David Wilks, president of Energy Supply for Xcel Energy. Meanwhile, Ken May, director of Abengoa Solar IST, emphasized the high potential of large-scale applications of the industrial solar installation technology, saying: ‘Proper use of the solar thermal energy produced at these facilities can improve plant efficiency while lowering CO2 emissions. The successful integration of solar and coal technologies will encourage more widespread use throughout the utility sector.’

    And, later this year, US utility group Florida Power and Light (FPL) plans to open the world’s first hybrid solar thermal facility to connect to an existing fossil fuel plant at its Martin Next Generation Solar Energy Center in Indiantown, Florida. At 75 MW the CSP installation will be the largest of FPL’s solar facilities and will consist of approximately 180,000 mirrors over roughly 500 acres (200 ha) at the existing plant location, which currently produces up to 2.8 GW.

    A Step Into the Light

    The world’s first ISCC plant is being constructed by Spanish engineering firm Abener at Ain Beni Mathar, In Morocco. This 470 MW plant is under development for state utility group Office National de l’Electricité (ONE) and uses parabolic trough technology to provide additional solar thermal component to a conventional gas-fired power island. The solar component will supply 20 MWe, leaving some 450 MW coming from the conventional thermal plant or an expected annual net production of 3538 GWh per year. The solar output is estimated at 1.13% of the annual production or some 40 GWh per year.

    The installation features a 180,000 m2 solar field, using 224 solar collector assemblies in 56 loops. The thermo-oil heat transfer fluid within is pumped to the power block at about 400ºC.

    Abener, in collaboration with Abengoa Solar and Teyma, the construction company of Abengoa, has engineered, designed and built the plant under the terms of a turnkey contract with Moroccan state energy company ONE. Rioglass manufactured the mirrors while the 8064 heat collector elements came from Schott. The EPC contractor is Abener Energia, which will also operate the plant together with 100% owner ONE.

    Algeria Making Second Solar Move

    The world’s second ISCC plant is being constructed in Algeria again by Abener, in collaboration with Abengoa Solar (both are subsidiary companies of Abengoa), which is providing the design and will act as the technician of the solar part. The 150 MWe Hassi R’Mel Project, located near the town of the same name, is being lead by the project company Solar Power Plant 1 (SPP1) – majority held by engineering group Abener with a 51% stake. The project will adjoin an existing Sonelgaz power station at Tilghemt located at the country’s largest natural gas field, Hassi R’Mel, in northern Algeria.

    Bidding on the build-own-operate contract launched in June 2004 and saw close to 10 companies bid, including General Electric, Lavallin, Siemens, Alstom and Black & Veatch.

    Subsequently, the construction contract was signed in December 2006. The plant is to be developed on behalf of New Energy Algeria (NEAL), a joint venture set up by state-owned oil and gas and electricity majors, Sonatrach and Sonelgaz respectively, and an agro-industrial firm Semouleries Industrielles de la Mitidja (SIM), to carry out renewable energy projects. NEAL has a 20% equity holding in SPP1. Sonatrach (through its subsidiary Société de Valorisation des Hydrocarbures, SVH) holds a further 14%, and Compañía Española de Financiación del Desarrollo S.A (COFIDES), a Spanish state and privately owned company that provides medium and long-term financial support for projects in foreign countries where there is a Spanish interest, has a 15% holding.

    At some 180,000 m², the two parabolic solar fields for the CSP component use Solucar TR troughs with galvanized steel framing, designed by Abengoa Solar NT, and again using glass mirrors manufactured at Abengoa Solar’s Rioglass Solar factory. The solar fields will comprise 224 parabolic collectors in 56 loops and the solar contribution to the total output is estimated at some 20 MWe. It will work in conjunction with a 130 MW CCGT plant comprising two 42 MW SGT-800 gas turbines supplied by Siemens and a 80 MW SST-900 steam turbine supplied also by Siemens.

    The EPC contractor is formed by Abener and Teyma, which in April 2009 awarded the contract for the electrical balance of plant to ABB. The order, worth $14 million, includes design, engineering, supply, erection and commissioning of the medium- and low-voltage switchgear, auxiliary transformers, generator circuit breakers, isolated bus-ducts and emergency diesel generators. The project is expected to be completed by August 2010. Technical assistance was provided by Lahmeyer International while the lead bank behind the approximately €320 million scheme is Banque Extérieure d’Algérie (BEA).

    Outlook: Broadly Sunny

    With ISCC facilities in Morocco and Algeria currently in final commissioning, the technology is now in a position to demonstrate the essential track record of reliability for widespread acceptance.

    (Left: A Siemens SST-900 steam turbine rotor lies at the heart of Hassi R’Mel. Credit: Siemens)

    Certainly, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region offers considerable scope for such developments with its ideal climate and ample space. Perhaps recognising this, national governments in the region are introducing measures that support such developments. The Hassi R’Mel development, for example, follows the introduction of a national programme for the development of renewable energy, the so-called Algerian Sustainable Energy Development Plan for 2020, together with a feed-in tariff scheme which has been in place since March 2004 and which offers elevated tariffs for renewable power production such as that coming from solar thermal capacity.

    On the broader scale, ultimately it is envisaged that energy from such installations will be exported to the key demand centres of continental Europe via under-sea HVDC interconnection cables. Tewfik Hasni, ex-chief executive of NEAL has already reportedly proposed a 3000 km transmission line stretching from the Algerian town of Adrar to the German city of Aachen.

    Egypt has also proposed an ISCC development at Kuraymat, about 95 km south of Cairo, on the eastern side of the river Nile, with the country’s New and Renewable Energy Authority (NREA) tendering – in 2005 – for a 150 MW ISCC plant with a solar power island consisting of a parabolic trough solar field. On completion, the plant will generate some 20 MWe from its solar capacity, producing around 33 GWh anually.

    And, Iran is expected to commission an ISCC installation in the desert Yazd region featuring a solar thermal component of some 17 MW. The second of the two gas turbines planned at this 478 MW development is reportedly now operational and the plant is due for final commissioning this year. The contractor for the US$170 million project is the Iran Electricity Development Organisation.

    Meanwhile, the longer-term prospects for ISCC development were given a major boost in October 2009, when the Desertec Industrial Initiative (DII) – a project born under the auspices of the Club of Rome and other institutions – was launched. This project seeks to develop renewable energy production in the desert regions of the MENA for both local use and for export to Europe.

    Indeed, Abengoa Solar became a founding partner of the DII project, joining ABB, Deutsche Bank, EON, RWE, Schott Solar, Siemens, Solar Millennium/MSM and others.

    This initiative is aimed at meeting 15% of Europe’s energy needs, and a substantial part of the demand in Northern Africa and the Middle East, via concentrated solar plants and other renewable sources of energy by 2050. And, for example, DII is already collaborating with the ‘Mediterranean Solar Plan’, an initiative that was approved by the European Union in 2008 to promote large-scale solar power projects in Northern Africa.

    Reinforcing this positive outlook, Santiago Seage, CEO of Abengoa Solar has pointed out that: ‘Northern Africa and the Middle East are undoubtedly areas with a tremendous solar energy potential, for both the region’s own use as well as exporting as soon as we have the necessary infrastructure in place. This initiative should bring us closer to making this vision come true.’

    (Right: Under plans set out by the Desertec Industrial Initiative (DII), subsea cables will transmit solar energy from the MENA region to demand centres in continental Europe. Credit: ABB)