Category: News

Add your news
You can add news from your networks or groups through the website by becoming an author. Simply register as a member of the Generator, and then email Giovanni asking to become an author. He will then work with you to integrate your content into the site as effectively as possible.
Listen to the Generator News online

 
The Generator news service publishes articles on sustainable development, agriculture and energy as well as observations on current affairs. The news service is used on the weekly radio show, The Generator, as well as by a number of monthly and quarterly magazines. A podcast of the Generator news is also available.
As well as Giovanni’s articles it picks up the most pertinent articles from a range of other news services. You can publish the news feed on your website using RSS, free of charge.
 

  • Behind Closed Doors

    lick here to enable desktop notifications for Gmail.   Learn more  Hide
    1 of 1
    AdHome Loan Pre Approvalwww.loans.com.au – 3 Month Home Loan Pre Approval. Takes Just 2 Minutes! Apply Now.

    Behind closed doors

    Inbox
    x

    Claire, Solar Citizens

    8:32 AM (3 minutes ago)

    to me

    Dear NEVILLE,

    This is it. Right now the future of solar is in the hands of only six politicians – and yours.

    In the coming days three government ministers will sit down with three Labor ministers deep inside Parliament House in Canberra to decide the future of the Renewable Energy Target.

    They’re meeting behind closed doors to discuss Australia’s most successful policy for solar and renewables – and with them preparing for discussions right now, we want you to show them Australia will be watching.

    Tell our negotiators that you want them to stay strong for Aussie solar – take a minute to write your personal message on their Facebook pages:

    You can send your Facebook messages by posting on each politician’s page or by sending them a direct message. When they see our messages popping up on their pages, there will be no doubt that our eyes will be on them when the negotiations get underway.

    The Federal government has waged a campaign to destroy solar and the Target this year, but together Solar Citizens all over Australia have stood up. We’ve signed petitions, written letters and emails, made phone calls, met with politicians and rallied to demand our politicians give solar a fair go.

    We’re making progress. Our actions led to the government binning its dodgy, hand-picked Warburton review. We’ve forced them to the negotiating table with the growing realisation that they’re out of touch with what the community wants – and the community wants more solar and renewables, not less.

    Now we need to make ourselves heard again so these negotiations result in protecting, not undermining, the Renewable Energy Target. Write your Facebook message to the key negotiators today by clicking on the links below:

    When it comes down to it, this decision is about the livelihoods of solar workers, the right of Australians to go solar and take control of their energy bills, and for Australians to take the power back from the government and big energy companies.

    Thank you for everything you’ve done so far. We’re getting closer, so let’s lock in a strong solar-powered future.

    Claire, National Director

    P.S. Just two weeks ago the government’s Cabinet Ministers binned the recommendations of its own dodgy, hand-picked Warburton review which suggested cutting or scrapping the Renewable Energy Target. They finally realised Australians won’t accept its extreme anti-solar agenda and want the Target protected. By flooding the Facebook pages of the six politicians who will sit at the table in coming days to negotiate the fate of the Target, we can make sure they don’t forget us when they’re behind closed doors. Write a message (or six!) on the Facebook pages of the key negotiators today.

    Solar Citizens
    http://www.solarcitizens.org.au/

    -=-=-

    Solar Citizens is working to protect the rights of million of Australian solar owners to cut bills, create cleaner power and take energy generation back into our own hands. You can also keep up with Solar Citizens on Twitter or like us on Facebook.

  • Climatologists explain the widening of the Tropic Belts

    ScienceDaily: Your source for the latest research news
    Featured Research
    from universities, journals, and other organizations
    Climatologists offer explanation for widening of Earth’s tropical belt
    Date:
    March 18, 2014
    Source:
    University of California – Riverside
    Summary:
    Climatologists posit that the recent widening of the tropical belt is primarily caused by multi-decadal sea surface temperature variability in the Pacific Ocean. This variability includes the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (a long-lived El Niño-like pattern of Pacific climate variability) and anthropogenic pollutants, which act to modify the Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Until now there was no clear explanation for what is driving the widening.
    Share This

    Email to a friend
    Facebook
    Twitter
    LinkedIn
    Google+
    Print this page

    A cool-water anomaly known as La Niña occupied the tropical Pacific Ocean throughout 2007 and early 2008. In April 2008, scientists at NASA’s …
    [show more]
    Credit: NASA image by Jesse Allen, AMSR-E data processed and provided by Chelle Gentemann and Frank Wentz, Remote Sensing Systems
    [Click to enlarge image]

    Recent studies have shown that Earth’s tropical belt — demarcated, roughly, by the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn — has progressively expanded since at least the late 1970s. Several explanations for this widening have been proposed, such as radiative forcing due to greenhouse gas increase and stratospheric ozone depletion.

    Now, a team of climatologists, led by researchers at the University of California, Riverside, posits that the recent widening of the tropical belt is primarily caused by multi-decadal sea surface temperature variability in the Pacific Ocean. This variability includes the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO), a long-lived El Niño-like pattern of Pacific climate variability that works like a switch every 30 years or so between two different circulation patterns in the North Pacific Ocean. It also includes, the researchers say, anthropogenic pollutants, which act to modify the PDO.

    Study results appear March 16 in Nature Geoscience.

    “Prior analyses have found that climate models underestimate the observed rate of tropical widening, leading to questions on possible model deficiencies, possible errors in the observations, and lack of confidence in future projections,” said Robert J. Allen, an assistant professor of climatology in UC Riverside’s Department of Earth Sciences, who led the study. “Furthermore, there has been no clear explanation for what is driving the widening.”

    Now Allen’s team has found that the recent tropical widening is largely driven by the PDO.

    “Although this widening is considered a ‘natural’ mode of climate variability, implying tropical widening is primarily driven by internal dynamics of the climate system, we also show that anthropogenic pollutants have driven trends in the PDO,” Allen said. “Thus, tropical widening is related to both the PDO and anthropogenic pollutants.”

    Widening concerns

    Tropical widening is associated with several significant changes in our climate, including shifts in large-scale atmospheric circulation, like storm tracks, and major climate zones. For example, in Southern California, tropical widening may be associated with less precipitation.

    Of particular concern are the semi-arid regions poleward of the subtropical dry belts, including the Mediterranean, the southwestern United States and northern Mexico, southern Australia, southern Africa, and parts of South America. A poleward expansion of the tropics is likely to bring even drier conditions to these heavily populated regions, but may bring increased moisture to other areas.

    Widening of the tropics would also probably be associated with poleward movement of major extratropical climate zones due to changes in the position of jet streams, storm tracks, mean position of high and low pressure systems, and associated precipitation regimes. An increase in the width of the tropics could increase the area affected by tropical storms (hurricanes), or could change climatological tropical cyclone development regions and tracks.

    Belt contraction

    Allen’s research team also showed that prior to the recent (since ~1980 onwards) tropical widening, the tropical belt actually contracted for several decades, consistent with the reversal of the PDO during this earlier time period.

    “The reversal of the PDO, in turn, may be related to the global increase in anthropogenic pollutant emissions prior to the ~ early 1980s,” Allen said.

    Analysis

    Allen’s team analyzed IPCC AR5 (5th Assessment Report) climate models, several observational and reanalysis data sets, and conducted their own climate model experiments to quantify tropical widening, and to isolate the main cause.

    “When we analyzed IPCC climate model experiments driven with the time-evolution of observed sea surface temperatures, we found much larger rates of tropical widening, in better agreement to the observed rate–particularly in the Northern Hemisphere,” Allen said. “This immediately pointed to the importance of sea surface temperatures, and also suggested that models are capable of reproducing the observed rate of tropical widening, that is, they were not ‘deficient’ in some way.”

    Encouraged by their findings, the researchers then asked the question, “What aspect of the SSTs is driving the expansion?” They found the answer in the leading pattern of sea surface temperature variability in the North Pacific: the PDO.

    They supported their argument by re-analyzing the models with PDO-variability statistically removed.

    “In this case, we found tropical widening — particularly in the Northern Hemisphere — is completely eliminated,” Allen said. “This is true for both types of models–those driven with observed sea surface temperatures, and the coupled climate models that simulate evolution of both the atmosphere and ocean and are thus not expected to yield the real-world evolution of the PDO.

    “If we stratify the rate of tropical widening in the coupled models by their respective PDO evolution,” Allen added, “we find a statistically significant relationship: coupled models that simulate a larger PDO trend have larger tropical widening, and vice versa. Thus, even coupled models can simulate the observed rate of tropical widening, but only if they simulate the real-world evolution of the PDO.”

    Future work

    Next, the researchers will be looking at how anthropogenic pollutants, by modifying the PDO and large scale weather systems, have affected precipitation in the Southwest United States, including Southern California.

    “Future emissions pathways show decreased pollutant emissions through the 21st century, implying pollutants may continue to drive a positive PDO and tropical widening,” Allen said.

    Story Source:

    The above story is based on materials provided by University of California – Riverside. The original article was written by Iqbal Pittalwala. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

    Journal Reference:

    Robert J. Allen, Joel R. Norris, Mahesh Kovilakam. Influence of anthropogenic aerosols and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation on tropical belt width. Nature Geoscience, 2014; DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2091

  • Carbon capture and storage — reality or still a dream?

    Australia
    16 October 2014, 6.27am AEDT

    Carbon capture and storage — reality or still a dream?

    To have any chance of avoiding dangerous climate change we’ll have to reduce the carbon emissions from our energy sectors — currently the largest human source of greenhouse gas emissions globally. And…

    Could carbon capture and storage be the way to clean up coal power stations, such as this one in Australia’s Latrobe Valley? Monash University/Flickr, CC BY-NC

    To have any chance of avoiding dangerous climate change we’ll have to reduce the carbon emissions from our energy sectors — currently the largest human source of greenhouse gas emissions globally. And we’ll have to do it quickly.

    Renewable energy is one solution. But given ongoing debate about supplying enough energy for a growing population, and replacing old fossil fuel energy generators, options such as carbon capture and storage have been hailed as another.

    Recently the largest carbon capture and storage program yet began operation at SaskPower’s Boundary Dam project in Saskatchewan, Canada. The project retrofitted a 138 megawatt coal power station into a 110 megawatt station, and is expected to capture 90% of the carbon emissions produced through burning the coal.

    Carbon capture and storage, or CCS, gained attention as far back as 1995, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change speculated that yet-to-be-developed CCS technology might be applied to large fossil fuel generators.

    The Canadian project demonstrates that the technology can be used, but we now know it comes at considerable cost, and may not even reduce overall carbon emissions.

    Many of these issues have been presented in a CCS Information Paper by Beyond Zero Emissions, of which I am the CEO.

    Why CCS?

    The rationales supporting CCS include the technical, economic and political obstacles in the transition to a zero carbon energy system such as one reliant on renewable energy.

    From a physical construction point of view, replacement of existing emission intensive generation capacity, on top of the additional capacity required in developing economies, is a daunting prospect. Particularly when considering the ever tightening time-frame for change for preventing dangerous climate change.

    How CCS works LeJean Hardin and Jamie Payne derivative work: Jarl Arntzen/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA
    Click to enlarge

    In addition, a political minefield awaits the regulated obsolescence of a large utility asset portfolio of mixed public and private shareholders as greenhouse gas emissions cease to be ignored.

    It’s no wonder that the possibility to adapt these assets to operate without emitting carbon dioxide invites temptation — a circuit breaker of sorts.

    CCS doesn’t work if you’re digging up more fossil fuels

    The Canadian CCS project will use the captured carbon to help extract crude oil. This is partly to offset the cost of capturing carbon, but what does it mean for carbon emissions?

    The CO2 injected into oil-bearing rock mixes with the oil and allows that oil (now mixed with CO2) to move to the surface, via wells, for recovery.

    After separating the CO2 from the recovered oil, CO2 (valued by the industry between US$25-$40 per tonne) is cycled back into the ground again and again.

    Ultimately some CO2 will remain permanently stored. But CO2 enhanced oil recovery can produce between 0.2 and 1.1 tonnes of oil for every tonne of CO2 permanently stored (see also here and here).

    Nearly all of the oil will be burned to produce 0.6 to 3.4 tonnes of CO2. Therefore, the ratio of CO2 stored to CO2 released due to oil burning ranges from 0.6-to-1 to 3.4-to-1. That’s either slightly climate-positive (with an overall storing of carbon) or very climate-damaging (with carbon released overall).

    In order to maximise profit, oil producers will inevitably target the most climate-damaging reservoirs where the greatest amount of oil can be recovered by using the least amount of CO2.

    On top of emissions from oil, in North America where most of the new CO2 injection activities are planned, any CO2 permanently stored is not expected to be monitored and verified. No legal mechanisms have been established. So in this case the permanent storage of any CO2 should be considered incidental.

    High cost — for what gain?

    So why use CO2 to retrieve oil at all? One reason is to offset to considerable costs of retrofitting the coal power station, and countering the 21% drop in power output.

    The essential goal behind CCS is to preserve capital assets while transitioning to zero carbon emissions. But this argument doesn’t hold up under scrutiny.

    We can de-carbonise electricity by replacing fossil fuel power with renewable, or retrofitting fossil fuel power with CCS, or a mix of both. But no matter which path we choose, it will come at the expense of emissions-intensive power generators, and then passed on to society.

    This can come through devalued share holder capital from closing power stations early, or through additional investment for CCS.

    In the case of the latter, the capital returns of fossil fuel generators renewed by CCS would be clipped by a wholesale electricity market in which renewable generation is already proving competitive. Any room in the wholesale market for price increases would be borne by electricity customers.

    Additional investment not generating additional revenue dilutes returns, effectively consuming the pre-existing capital. Any shareholder of a company experiencing an unproductive equity raising is aware of this reality. The only capital preserved therefore would be the balance of existing and new capital – if any.

    The Canadian CCS project is the first chance to test this point. A reported CA$1.35 billion (AU$1.56bn) including a CA$240 million government grant has been invested to retrofit the coal power station with CCS — converting 139 megawatts to 110 megawatts.

    Compare this with the recent sale of the NSW owned MacGen to AGL — 4,640 megawatts for the sum of AU$1.5 billion. Clearly any attempt to refit Macquarie Generation with CCS would prove far more costly than foregoing such a sale value.

    It is clear that it would be less costly to simply replace emission intensive generators — a cost that would be offset by avoided future fuel expenditure.

    More cost and less abatement

    Quite aside from greenhouse gas emissions which CCS seeks to resolve, other problems remain with the continued use of fossil fuels.

    Mine site land-use conflict with agricultural production and protected areas of bio-diversity, fire risk of exposed flammable material, combustion waste solids and other pollutants not addressed by carbon capture, as well as water intensity of thermally inefficient generators to name but a few.

    It must be questioned why infrastructure which entails such significant external costs would be adhered to so determinedly, even if CCS could be proved as a slightly commercial proposition.

    When it’s clear that CCS is not even close to a commercial prospect and when net CO2 emissions may actually increase when combined with oil recovery we must accept reality and swiftly move on to proven and affordable solutions to reducing carbon emissions such as renewable energy, energy efficiency and reforestation to name but a few.

  • Solar energy that doesn’t block the view

    ScienceDaily: Your source for the latest research news
    Featured Research
    from universities, journals, and other organizations
    Solar energy that doesn’t block the view
    Date:
    August 19, 2014
    Source:
    Michigan State University
    Summary:
    Researchers have developed a new type of solar concentrator that when placed over a window creates solar energy while allowing people to actually see through the window. It is called a transparent luminescent solar concentrator and can be used on buildings, cell phones and any other device that has a flat, clear surface.
    Share This

    Email to a friend
    Facebook
    Twitter
    LinkedIn
    Google+
    Print this page

    Solar power with a view: MSU doctoral student Yimu Zhao holds up a transparent luminescent solar concentrator module.
    Credit: Yimu Zhao
    [Click to enlarge image]

    A team of researchers at Michigan State University has developed a new type of solar concentrator that when placed over a window creates solar energy while allowing people to actually see through the window.

    It is called a transparent luminescent solar concentrator and can be used on buildings, cell phones and any other device that has a clear surface.

    And, according to Richard Lunt of MSU’s College of Engineering, the key word is “transparent.”

    Research in the production of energy from solar cells placed around luminescent plastic-like materials is not new. These past efforts, however, have yielded poor results — the energy production was inefficient and the materials were highly colored.

    “No one wants to sit behind colored glass,” said Lunt, an assistant professor of chemical engineering and materials science. “It makes for a very colorful environment, like working in a disco. We take an approach where we actually make the luminescent active layer itself transparent.”

    The solar harvesting system uses small organic molecules developed by Lunt and his team to absorb specific nonvisible wavelengths of sunlight.

    “We can tune these materials to pick up just the ultraviolet and the near infrared wavelengths that then ‘glow’ at another wavelength in the infrared,” he said.

    The “glowing” infrared light is guided to the edge of the plastic where it is converted to electricity by thin strips of photovoltaic solar cells.

    “Because the materials do not absorb or emit light in the visible spectrum, they look exceptionally transparent to the human eye,” Lunt said.

    One of the benefits of this new development is its flexibility. While the technology is at an early stage, it has the potential to be scaled to commercial or industrial applications with an affordable cost.

    “It opens a lot of area to deploy solar energy in a non-intrusive way,” Lunt said. “It can be used on tall buildings with lots of windows or any kind of mobile device that demands high aesthetic quality like a phone or e-reader. Ultimately we want to make solar harvesting surfaces that you do not even know are there.”

    Lunt said more work is needed in order to improve its energy-producing efficiency. Currently it is able to produce a solar conversion efficiency close to 1 percent, but noted they aim to reach efficiencies beyond 5 percent when fully optimized. The best colored LSC has an efficiency of around 7 percent.

    The research was featured on the cover of a recent issue of the journal Advanced Optical Materials.

  • Report: Fossil fuel companies found paying lip service to climate risks 41 14 2

    Report: Fossil fuel companies found paying lip service to climate risks

     41  14 2

     1

    • October 16, 2014 • Comments (0)

    fossil fuel companies

    Coal, oil and gas companies almost universally recognise the risks climate change poses to their businesses, yet just 7% are integrating these threats into their spending choices.

    That’s the latest warning of UK think-tank the Carbon Tracker Initiative, as new analysis -– in partnership with CDP and Ceres  – shows that many companies are simply paying “lip service” to climate risk.

    The research examined the answers of 81 coal, oil and gas companies who took part in a survey by CDP – including some of the world’s largest fossil fuels companies such as BP, Statoil, ExxonMobil, Chevron, BHP Billton and Rio Tinto.

    Of the companies asked, 86% said they consider climate change a physical risk for their business, while 99% thought climate-related regulation, including carbon taxes or cap and trade schemes, to be risk to their operations.

    Yet just 7% of companies provide evidence that they were adequately integrating this risk into their spending assessments – showing these companies are “failing to connect the dots”.

    Last week, Bank of England governor Mark Carney became the latest figure to warn that companies risk being left with a product they can not sell as the world takes action to tackle climate change.

    He warned a World Bank seminar “the vast majority of reserves are unburnable”.

    It is widely accepted that to keep global warming below 2°C, the vast majority of fossil fuels will have to be left in the ground.

    Mark Campanale, Founder and Executive Director of the Carbon Tracker Initiative warned companies must do more to disclose the threat this places on their businesses.

    With the IEA forecasting that $23 trillion will be invested in expanding the fossil fuel sector up to 2035, putting this amount of capital at risk doesn’t leave much room for complacency in how climate risks are disclosed.

    Four out of five of the companies show no evidence of analysing how different temperature increases could impact their business, while around 10% of the oil and gas companies, and just one coal company, stress-test projects against the internationally agreed goal of limiting warming to 2°C.

    Just two of the 32 coal companies who responded to the report survey accept this limit agreed on by governments.

    And while 25 companies “acknowledge climate change”, only five of these went on to “acknowledge that climate change requires emissions reductions”.

    With the survey sample representing the “best in class” sample – the 24% of fossil fuels companies that received and responded to CDPs 2014 climate change questionnaire – these figures are particularly worrying.

    The failure of these companies to disclose how they plan to deal with the transition to a low carbon economy or international climate legislation may affect their business model should sound a warning bell to investors, warn the researchers.

    Mindy Lubber, president of the sustainable advocacy group Ceres said:

    The report highlights the vast gulf between what investors are looking for and what energy companies are not providing in regards to financial risks from high carbon, high cost fossil fuels projects. Investors should step up their calls to companies to better explain these huge expenditures.

    Carbon Tracker Initiative is calling on financial regulators and standard setting bodies to increase their scrutiny of fossil fuel companies and ensure they build “climate literate” capital markets.

    – See more at: http://tcktcktck.org/2014/10/report-fossil-fuel-companies-found-paying-lip-service-climate-risks/64803#sthash.VE6ODlYl.5l9IerJG.dpuf

  • Governments to discuss opportunities to reduce non-CO2 greenhouse gases

    Hero Background

    UN Climate Change NEWSROOM

    READ MORE