Kleenergy Ecosystems

Eden Project installs UK’s first employee-owned solar plant

kleenergyecosystems — Wed, 22 Feb 2012 12:42:28 +0000

New solar array in Cornwall hopes to make the case that renewable energy is not just for well-off householders

Matt Hastings, the Eden Project’s energy manager, in front of the UK’s first employee-owned renewable energy project. Photograph: apexnewspix.com/Apex

A new 50 kilowatt PV array at the Eden Project has just become the UK’s first employee owned renewables installation. Ebico, the Witney-based social enterprise that is the UK’s only not-for-profit electricity supplier, lent money to a new company that put 200 panels on the roofs of some of Eden’s storage buildings. Employees are now able to buy shares in the new business and the proceeds of this unique offer will be used to pay back Ebico. Savers putting in as little as £200 each will share in the feed-in tariff income for the next 25 years. Returns are projected to be over 10% per year for small investors.

Feed-in tariffs, particularly for solar PV, have been attacked because they subsidise richer householders at the expense of the rest of the population. The aim at Eden has been to show that renewables can also be of financial benefit to people not able to afford to put PV on their own roofs. I helped structure this deal and wrote the document that offers the shares to employees.

The recent changes in the solar PV tariffs mean that installation such as the one at Eden are less attractive to small investors. Other technologies, such as wind and anaerobic digestion, are now much more appropriate for employee or community financing. The returns to investors can be at least as high as we project for savers buying shares in the PV array at Eden.

The aims of feed-in tariffs are to encourage smaller renewable energy installations, push down the cost of new low-carbon technologies and, third, to assist in the decentralisation of electricity supply. The solar PV tariffs worked extraordinarily well at building up an efficient and competitive base of installers and reducing the price of household installations by about 50% in the space of two years. Anybody wanting an array on the roof of their house in 2009 would have got a quote of about £5,000 per kilowatt. Today, that price can be below £2,500 for a larger installation. There is no doubt that the PV tariffs successfully met the first two of the three aims that the government had for the tariffs.

What about the third objective- the decentralisation of electricity supply? The evidence here is mixed. Although hundreds of thousands of household PV installations have taken place, the impact on the electricity supply of the UK has been of the order of 0.1%. Wind turbines owned by community companies must surely be the next step. One 500 kilowatt wind turbine, the sort of size that might sit on a small hill at the edge of a town, can typically provide the same power output as three or four hundred domestic PV installations or twenty five times as much as the Eden array (the 50 kW Eden array will deliver about 47,000 kilowatt hours a year, or just under 1,000 kilowatt hours per kilowatt capacity. A well sited wind turbine will deliver a ‘capacity factor’ of over twice as much.)

The striking thing about community ownership of wind turbines is that local resistance disappears if people have a financial stake in their success. One wonderful Dutch study even showed that people ceased to hear the swishing noise of the blades if they had some ownership of the wind farm. Community ownership is the only way we are ever going to see the UK use its under-exploited resources of onshore wind. Today, the costs of the subsidies for renewable energy are borne by everybody but the benefits are largely flowing to the large electricity companies and richer householders. Larger scale community energy installations, such as the one at Eden, can achieve rapid growth of low carbon energy sources and also remove the regressive element in the feed-in tariffs.

The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/22/eden-project-employee-solar-plant?INTCMP=SRCH

‘Artificial leaf’ will convert sunlight into fuel

kleenergyecosystems — Tue, 21 Feb 2012 10:20:45 +0000

An “artificial leaf” which converts electricity and sunlight into fuel could soon become a reality, scientists claim.

Despite following a similar process to photosynthesis, the “artificial leaves” would look nothing like a plant Photo: Alamy

The technology is a “turbo-powered” version of photosynthesis, the natural process by which plants creates energy from sunlight, but uses electricity to spark the reaction.

Rather than producing carbohydrates, the end product is fuel which could be used in petrol engines to power cars and even aeroplanes, researchers said.

The Glasgow University scientists running the project expect to have fine-tuned the method within two years, and to have built a working model within five.

If used on a mass scale, the technology could supply a large quantity of the world’s fuel needs and be used instead of oil when stock starts to run out, they said.

Like photosynthesis, the process involves the absorption of carbon dioxide, so burning the fuel would not cause an increase in levels of the gas in the atmosphere.

Prof Richard Cogdell, who leads the research, said: “The big issue at the moment is that most renewable energy can only make electricity.

“We have not got ways to store electricity, and the supply is intermittent.”

In contrast fuels like hydrogen and ethanol produced through the new process could provide “energy on demand”, he added.

Despite following a similar process to photosynthesis, the “artificial leaves” would look nothing like a plant, Prof Cogdell said.

The designs consist of a large vat of water and genetically engineered bacteria which absorb sunlight but also use electricity from solar panels.

This will make the technology more efficient than plants, which typically only generate half a per cent more energy than they use up during photosynthesis, Prof Cogdell said.

The bacteria will convert the energy into hydrocarbon fuels, in a similar biological process to the method used by plants to make carbohydrates.

Speaking at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in Vancouver, Prof Cogdell said: “This is one of the grand challenges that mankind faces if we are going to sustain our way of life after oil runs out.

“We have to be able to make renewable, sustainable dense portable fuels for transport, especially for aeroplanes and ships, and electricity is just not going to cut it.”

The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/9088263/Artificial-leaf-will-convert-sunlight-into-fuel.html

UK could become leading exporter of wave and tidal power, say MPs

kleenergyecosystems — Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:39:08 +0000

New report from Energy and Climate Change Committee calls on government to establish long term goals for marine energy

A tidal turbine developed by Atlantis Resources Corporation at Invergordon, on the Cromarty Firth. The UK is home to about 35 of the worlds’ 120-130 wave and tidal energy developers. Photograph: Mike Brookes Roper/PA

The government will today be called on to increase its support for wave and tidal power in a new report from MPs warning the UK is at risk of repeating mistakes which allowed the country to lose its early lead in the developing wind power industry.

MPs on the Commons’ Energy and Climate Change Committee (ECC) on Monday released a report on the future of marine renewables, which will claim the UK could become a leading exporter of wave and tidal power equipment and expertise if the government adopts a more visionary approach to developing marine energy.

Seven of the the eight full-scale prototype devices installed worldwide are in UK waters, making the country the current world leader in the development of wave and tidal energy technologies.

The government has also recognised that marine power could provide up to 27GW of capacity in the UK by 2050, much of which is expected to be deployed after 2020.

But the report warns that an overly cautious approach to deployment may allow other less risk-averse countries to steal the UK’s lead.

Industry players are concerned that government proposals for subsidies for marine and tidal only extend to 2017, leaving a question mark over the sector’s long-term future.

The ECC report will issue a series of recommendations designed to ensure the UK retains its leading position, including clarifying how much revenue support marine power can expect to receive beyond 2017 as soon as possible.

It also recommends the government boost investor certainly by setting a target to reduce the cost of marine energy to 14p per kWh by 2020.

According to the Carbon Trust, the first wave farms are likely to cost 38-48p/kWh and the first tidal farms 29-33p/kWh, although developers remain confident costs will fall as technologies mature.

“Britannia really could rule the waves when it comes to marine renewable energy,” said committee chairman Tim Yeo. “We are extremely well placed to lead the world in wave and tidal technologies, which could potentially bring significant benefits in manufacturing and jobs, as well an abundant supply of reliable low-carbon electricity.”

The report urges the government not to repeat the same mistake it made in the 1980s in developing wind power, which saw the UK lose its one-time lead in research and testing wind turbines to Denmark, which is now home to the world’s largest supplier of wind turbines.

“In the eighties the UK squandered the lead it had in wind power development and now Denmark has a large share of the worldwide market in turbine manufacturing,” added Yeo. “It should be a priority for the Government to ensure that the UK remains at the cutting edge of developments in this technology and does not allow our lead to slip.”

A spokeswoman from the Department of Energy and Climate Change said the government was “fully committed to spurring on the growth of this industry”.

“[We] have already taken great strides to make this happen,” she said. “Last month Climate Change Minister Greg Barker launched the South West Marine Energy Park and there are plans to create similar parks in Scotland and Northern Ireland.”

The report was welcomed by green groups and renewable trade associations, including the UK’s leading marine power trade body Renewable UK.

“The marine energy industry is now on the threshold of commercial viability, and the Committee’s report contains important recommendations which, if implemented, will help push it towards becoming a major part of our electricity generation system,” said RenewableUK director of policy Dr Gordon Edge.

“Certainty is the watchword for securing the investment marine energy will require to become a major power source. We don’t yet have that certainty, and the Committee’s call for long-term clarity on Government support for marine energy is timely.”

Angus Norman, chief executive of Ocean Power Technologies Ltd, agreed the UK needs to take further action to accelerate the commercialisation of marine energy.

“Whilst recent proposals by the UK government to support the development of the sector go a long way to strengthen the business case for harnessing marine energy, the report makes a timely and strong case for further impetus if the UK is to extend its leadership in this sector and make it a commercial-scale marine renewable industry,” he said.

Friends of the Earth energy campaigner Paul Steedman said the report was right to highlight the UK’s huge potential for marine power.

“Most people don’t know we’re already world leaders in this technology,” he said. “”The right support for this pioneering industry would create tens of thousands of new jobs and provide a home-grown source of clean energy.

“The Government must make it easier for marine power developers to transform our broken energy system and shift us off our dangerous reliance on coal and gas.”

The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/20/uk-exporter-wave-tidal-power?INTCMP=SRCH

US wind industry warns 37,000 jobs at risk if tax credit lapses

kleenergyecosystems — Sun, 19 Feb 2012 06:22:15 +0000

American Wind Energy Association urges Congress to extend tax credit after measure is excluded from payroll tax bill

A windfarm near Palm Springs, California. Tax credits for US wind power appear unlikely to get an extension. Photograph: Gabriel Bouys/AFP/Getty Images

The US wind energy industry yesterday issued a stark warning that its recent progress will stall and 37,000 jobs could be at risk if Congress fails to extend a tax credit widely regarded as critical to wind farm developers.

The American Wind Energy Association warned that an extension of the federal wind energy production tax credit (PTC) does not appear to have been included in payroll tax legislation currently passing through Congress.

Failure to agree an extension of the tax break would result in its expiration at the end of the year – a scenario that experts claim would have a chilling effect on projects throughout the year.

“The stakes here could not be clearer,” American Wind Energy Association chief executive Denise Bode said in a statement. “Economic studies have shown that Congressional inaction on the PTC will kill 37,000 American jobs, shutter plants and cancel billions of dollars in private investment. Congress needs to understand that, with PTC uncertainty, layoffs have already begun and further job losses and even plant closings will accelerate each month as we near expiration in December.”

She added that the tax credit has significant bi-partisan support, while companies as diverse as Nike, Campbell Soup and Yahoo have all gone on record to call for the tax break to be extended.

“The broad base of support for wind energy positions us well to get the PTC extended at the next possible opportunity,” she said, adding that while it is disappointing the tax breaks have not been included in the controversial payroll tax bill, hope remains that the extension could be agreed later this year.

“The fact that Congress is on the verge of reaching a compromise on such a major piece of legislation bodes well for other legislation,” she said. “While Congress decided not to act on tax credit extenders or any energy provisions as part of the payroll tax bill, we are still committed to finding any opportunity for a first-quarter extension. Our campaign continues.”

In other Congressional news, the long-running row over president Obama’s decision to block the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline took another twist after the Republican-controlled House of Representatives passed a bill that will allow Congress to approve the controversial project.

The condition was attached to a highway funding bill, which now also includes measures to expand offshore oil drilling and open areas of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling.

The vote steps up pressure on Senate negotiations, where Republicans are also pushing for Keystone XL approval to be tied to the highway funding bill.

The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/17/us-wind-jobs-tax-credit?INTCMP=SRCH

Will Hurricanes Topple U.S. Wind Turbines?

kleenergyecosystems — Fri, 17 Feb 2012 23:36:37 +0000

As plans for wind farms rising out of the ocean along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts inch closer to fruition, a new study from Carnegie Mellon University suggests that hurricanes could destroy a significant number of turbines in some of these areas, even coming close to wiping them out.

Although turbines are designed to both harness and withstand the forces of wind, they can be severely damaged by too much of it. In the United States, Europe and Asia, turbines have caught fire, blades have shredded and towers have crumpled when hit by stormy gales.

The authors of the study, published on Monday in the National Academy of Sciences magazine PNAS, set out to quantify the likelihood that a hurricane could topple towers in American waters where projects are under consideration or development.

They looked what might happen to 50-turbine farms off the coasts of four states: North Carolina, New Jersey, Massachusetts and Texas. Feeding historical data about hurricane occurrence and intensity into a probabilistic model, they simulated potential damage to the turbine towers over several 20-year periods and then took an average.

Of the locations studied, Galveston County in Texas was the riskiest, followed by Dare County in North Carolina; the risk to farms in Atlantic County, N.J., and Dukes County, Mass., were found to be much lower. In Galveston, the researchers found, there is a 60 percent chance that at least one tower would buckle in a 20-year period and a 30 percent probability that more than half would be destroyed.

In North Carolina, there is a 60 percent probability that at least one tower would suffer damage but only a 9 percent chance that more than half would be destroyed.

The researchers found that the damage could be reduced by using turbines that can yaw, or rotate, quickly enough in the chaotic winds of a hurricane to relieve stress on the tower. In the case of Galveston, the use of rotating equipment would drop the risk of at least one tower buckling to 25 percent and the risk of more than half coming down to 10 percent.

With yawing turbines in North Carolina, the study found a 15 percent likelihood that a hurricane would take out at least one tower but a less than 1 percent likelihood that winds would take out more than half. The challenge, though, is providing a backup power source, given that the turbines cannot function in hurricane-speed winds.

Paulina Jaramillo, an assistant research professor in the Department of Engineering and Public Policy who is one of the study’s authors, said she hoped the study would help guide decisions about siting and design of wind farms.

“There is a trade-off because some of the states with the largest offshore wind resources are in the hurricane-prone areas,” she said. Building stronger turbines with more steel in the towers and fiberglass in the blades would be more expensive, she noted, as would furnishing batteries to fuel rotation when the turbine is not producing power.

“These are things that we can do, it’s just a matter of cost,” said Ms. Jaramillo, who manages the RenewElec project, which focuses on ways to help integrate renewable energy into the system.

The New York Times

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/13/will-hurricanes-topple-u-s-wind-turbines/?ref=windpower

Finding Energy Advantages Six Feet Under

kleenergyecosystems — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 22:26:17 +0000

Ball State UniversityA geothermal heat pump uses the earth as a heat source when operating in heating mode in the winter, and as a heat sink when operating in cooling mode in the summer.

To take one calorie of heat out of a hot classroom in the summertime, or to add a calorie to a cold space in the winter, Ball State University’s boilers, all from the middle of the last century, have to burn one calorie of coal. But in a few months, the university’s heating and cooling system will become seven times more efficient by dumping heat or gathering it, depending on the season, from the dirt around six feet under the campus.

It seems that universities are competing more and more these days in the efficiency of heating and cooling. New York University recently unveiled a heating and cooling system that it says is 90 percent efficient. Ball State, in Muncie, Ind., says its technology — called a ground source heat pump — is not new, but that its system will soon be the largest installation of its kind in the country, if not the world.

As with a conventional air conditioning or heating system, water is heated in winter or chilled in summer and moved through pipes that have room air blowing over them. Yet the heart of the technology is machinery that can transfer heat in either direction.

In the summer, it can take heat out of the piping that runs to the room air and put it in a separate water loop that can be sent to a cooling tower. In winter it can draw heat from a separate loop and add it to the piping for room air.

The key to the system is a series of pipes buried below the frost line, which in Indiana means about six feet under the ground. In the summer, water carrying heat from the air conditioning system can give off that unwanted energy to the soil, which is at 55 degrees. This expends considerably less energy than giving it off to the warm, muggy air. In the winter, it can pull out water at 55 degrees and extract heat from it to warm the rooms.

“When you’re heating or cooling, everything is about transferring energy,’’ said James W. Lowe, the director of engineering, construction and operation at Ball State, where he oversees the heating and cooling of some 5.5 million square feet.

The system will eliminate almost all of the university’s $3 million annual bill for fuel but will take about $1 million a year in electricity to run.

The installation, which will take several years, will cost $75 million to $80 million, Mr. Lowe said.

That would seem to imply a payback time of about 40 years. But two of the university’s boilers date from 1940 and another two from 1955, and all are due for replacement. The university priced out new boilers, which could have burned coal but also up to 30 percent wood or other biomass, but those would have cost $65 million to $70 million, Mr. Lowe said. So the additional cost involved in cycling energy into and out of the ground is at most $15 million, he said.

The New York Times

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/09/finding-energy-advantages-six-feet-under/?scp=8&sq=renewable%20energy&st=cse

Grid blackout threat weighs on renewables take-up

kleenergyecosystems — Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:42:14 +0000

The renewable energy industry continues to face an uphill battle in convincing power producers that integrating more renewable energies will not put the grid in jeopardy

Europe will have to slow down its integration of renewable energies or risk power cuts, says the policy chief of Europe’s electric industry association. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA

The policy chief of Europe’s electricity industry association has told EurActiv that Europe will have to slow down its integration of renewable energies or risk power cuts and systems instability because of the slow pace of cross-border grid improvements.

“Either you go very fast in the transition – which is impossible [because] smart grids are expensive and the storage is not there in the needed scope – or you diminish the speed for integrating renewables into the system,” Susanne Nies of Eurelectric told EurActiv in a phone interview.

Given a choice between meeting the EU’s target of getting 20% of energy – and 35% of the EU’s electricity mix – from renewables by 2020 or keeping the system stable, “I would rather say that system stability and avoiding blackouts is more important,” she said.

Nies cited a report claiming a rise of serious systems stability incidents last year from 300 to 1,000 across a swathe of northern Europe, and said that the Czech Republic came close to power black-outs in November and December 2010.

“We want to meet the 2020 targets but we need to be very careful,” she said, “because the worst case scenario is one in which we have a series of blackouts in Europe and there would be a loss of support first for the utilities but maybe also for the renewables. That would be a disaster.”

Her words reflect pessimism in the electricity transmission industry about the likelihood of balancing capacity for variable energy sources like wind and solar in time for 2020. Usually though, this is voiced off the record.

Speaking to EurActiv last month, another industry insider said that renewables advocates “want to increase solar panels and we want to keep the lights on, but if the lights go out because PV [solar photovoltaic energy] has not maintained the power quality, it’s not in either of our interests.”

“If we’re connecting things that the system wasn’t designed for,” the source continued, “we’re putting stresses on it. Some people think it is a bit conservative for network operators to say that, but maybe it’s good to have a bit of conservatism when you’re thinking about a constant electricity supply. There is a bit of a trade-off between security of supply and reliability” and renewables.

Renewable energy advocates accept that Europe’s grid systems were built for fossil fuels but “the point is that this period is over,” said Arthouros Zervos, president of the European Renewable Energy Council. “We have to adapt and do it fast.”

Hydroelectric pump storage is currently the most efficient way of balancing electricity loads which can vary for renewables, when the weather is cloudy or windless.

Zervos said that some counties such as Italy had a probable excess of pump storage capacity while others had deficits.

As a result, “we would need much less storage if we improved our [cross-border] interconnections,” Zervos told EurActiv, “because then you could use the storage capacity of your neighbouring countries.”

Anders Eldrup, chief executive of Dong Energy and a former permanent secretary in the Danish finance ministery, noted that similar concerns about integrating renewables had been expressed in his country’s past.

“When Denmark began pioneering onshore and offshore wind 35 years ago, people said ‘When it becomes 5% of total supply, we’ll have an unstable system’,” he told EurActiv.

“Then they said ‘when its 10%’, but we managed. Today it is more than 22%, the government wants to increase it to 50% in 2020, and the system is stable.”

To advance electricity market integration by 2014, the EU hopes to have implemented one ‘common algorithm’ to determine electricity prices across Europe.

In the same year, common network code requirements for Europe’s power networks, currently being devised by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E), are also scheduled to take effect.

“The future will be challenging,” one ENTSO-E source said of current grid integration concerns. “Keeping a secure system in the next years is our main concern and we are taking all possible actions within our legal mandate to support this goal.”

Nies called for the EU to mount a public acceptance campaign to overcome planning objections to transmission grid construction, better balancing provisions for renewables, more pump storage and grid interconnections, improved risk-sharing facilities, and a resolution of ‘loop flow’ problems, which can involve electricity being sent through several countries to avoid transmission bottlenecks.

But she also sounded a note of caution about anticipated haggling over the energy infrastructure package.

“I am very afraid that member states will refuse to use the regional funds in the infrastructure package for those projects which are not exclusively in their national interest,” she said.

“For the cross-border interconnections we need, there has to be a commitment from member states for much more Europe. It is impossible to do this with a nationalistic and North Korean-type approach.”

Mark Johnston, a senior policy director for the World Wildlife Fund, said: “Networks must develop in parallel with renewables growth. The new proposals reinforce a good existing national framework. Europe is doing what it can but it can only do so much and it is for other players including member states and local authorities and regulators to do their part too.”

In written comments submitted to EurActiv after being interviewed, Susanne Nies , the head of energy policy at Eurelectric, said it was important to clarify that a fast transition to improving grid systems involved “developing the system needed to complement the integration of RES [renewables] – interconnections and grids, smart grids, and storage, as well as back up capacity” and that if this could not be done, “you must diminish, if you can not do this for the reason of public opposition of finance, the speed of putting new RES to the system. In addition, all this has to be done as a European approach, which ensures cost efficiency.”

Nies also called for the EU “to address the current investment concern, and the need for improved risk-sharing facilities. A European approach to system stability must ensure that the current ‘loop flow’ issues is solved, and that phase shifters on the borders don’t become the rule,” she said.

In meeting the EU’s 2020 targets, “policy makers as well as all other stakeholders need to be aware, and accountable of the consequences that has: grids, storage, back up, comprehensive regulation, back up capacity. In extremis, she was concerned that the EU would remain “sticking to a RES MegaWatt add in logics, sudden or even retroactive changes in support schemes, like in Spain or Estonia, or major system stability concerns including even blackouts in Europe. These might translate into a loss of support even for renewables development.”

However, Brook Riley, an energy spokesman for Friends of the Earth, was not impressed. “Eurelectric are saying this but at the same time they are doing what they can to block a strong energy efficiency directive,” he told EurActiv. “Of course what they are not saying is that if you reduce the overall energy demand you’ve got less to do to meet the EU’s 20% renewables target. The simplest way to increase the share of renewables is to reduce energy demand which Eurelectric is more or less openly opposing.”

The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/10/grid-blackout-threat-renewables?INTCMP=SRCH

Surplus Renewable Energy: An Update

kleenergyecosystems — Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:26:00 +0000

Last year I wrote about sudden surges in renewable energy that set up a conflict between wind producers in the Pacific Northwest and the Bonneville Power Administration, a federal agency that runs hydroelectric dams and the regional grid. When unseasonable storms created a simultaneous surplus of wind and water, Bonneville gave free power away but still had to deal with an oversupply that could overwhelm the grid.

Matthew Ryan Williams for The New York TimesThe Kittitas Valley wind farm near Ellenburg, Wash.

Eventually it resorted to unplugging the wind machines because routing excess water around its dams could create excess bubbles in the river, hurting salmon. The Federal Energy Regulatory Administration eventually ruled that Bonneville had been wrong to unplug the machines because this was discriminating against the wind producers, and this week, Bonneville proposed a monetary settlement with them.

Bonneville proposes to share the damages incurred by the wind producers, who not only lose the value of their production when their machines are turned off but also the federal production tax credit.

But at a two-day National Electricity Forum sponsored by the Energy Department and others, the federal energy secretary, Steven Chu, on Wednesday proposed a different set of solutions to the problem, which is likely to emerge elsewhere as installations of renewable energy expand and systems have to cope with surges or deficits of power they cannot predict.

One solution would be to break down the barriers between utilities so that the variability of generation can be leveled out over a larger area, Dr. Chu suggested. Routing more power to California would be a good first move, he said.

(Bonneville does not agree; renewable energy generation tends to peak in California at the same time that it does in the Pacific Northwest, the agency says.)

Another would be using batteries, the secretary of energy said. The problem is that at the moment, the batteries needed to store just one kilowatt-hour (the amount needed to run an window air conditioner for an hour) cost about $350.

That is steep, given that the average price of that amount of energy is about 11 cents. But at $100, Dr. Chu said, batteries would “go viral’’ and change the energy equation.

But there are simpler solutions, the secretary said. He said he recently visited a medical center in Houston that ran a power plant that produced both electricity and steam and could run at very high efficiency when both were needed. The problem, Dr. Chu said, is that at some hours, especially at night, there was not much need for the steam. So the medical center was using it to run a cooling device that was usually a component of an air-conditioning system.

In this case, it was simply chilling water in a tank that could be used to cool the building the next day. “The amount of energy needed to keep that tank cold is one-tenth of what you’d need to chill it,’’ he said, describing a method of storing energy as cold water instead of as electricity.

There are “more exotic” forms of storage that take up less space — making ice, for example — “but water works just fine,” he said.

As the use of renewable energy spreads, some companies are storing energy as heat rather than cold. And some are harnessing batteries at the point of generation.

Dr. Chu described a synergy between batteries for plug-in hybrid or electric cars and batteries for the grid. “If I look at the world 10 years ago versus today, we were kind of a sleepy outpost’’ for batteries, he said, with no demand beyond “laptops, some power tools, and toothbrushes.”

“And now they’re saying it’s a $150 billion market,’’ he said.

Dr. Chu predicted that some of that would spill over into the grid. Until then, Bonneville proposes that its customers share the costs of unplugging the wind machines during times of high river flows with the wind producers.

The New York Times

http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/surplus-renewable-energy-an-update/?scp=2&sq=renewable%20energy&st=Search

Windfarms: An ill wind of change?

kleenergyecosystems — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 12:25:08 +0000

As the world’s biggest windfarm opens off Cumbria, critics continue to question the turbine boom.

The future is at sea: sunset over the Walney offshore windfarm, being officially opened today Photo: ALAMY

Less than a week ago 106 mostly Conservative MPs wrote to the Prime Minister, urging cuts in public subsidies to UK windfarms, on the grounds that these towering turbines were neither efficient to run nor pleasing on the eye. Yet today sees the opening, in Cumbria, of the world’s biggest-ever windfarm, the switch-on to be performed by Ed Davey, the new man in charge of energy and climate change (his predecessor Chris Huhne having temporarily pulled the plug on his political career).

So while Westminster continues to provide an ever-renewable source of Cabinet ministers, it also houses plenty of people who are far from fired up by the prospect of green power, as provided by a 150ft wind turbine. Reviews of windfarms so far read “stupid” (Lord Lawson) and “absolutely useless” (Duke of Edinburgh). Their comments have now been amplified by the MPs’ letter.

“In these financially straitened times,” they write, “we think it is unwise to make consumers pay, through taxpayer subsidies, for the inefficient and intermittent energy production that typifies onshore wind turbines.” They go on to question whether new, give-developers-the-benefit-of-the-doubt planning guidelines mean that objectors will, effectively, be tilting at windmills when it comes to stopping turbines sprouting in nearby fields.

All in all, then, something of a frosty welcome for the new minister. Except there is one small glowing ember on which he can warm his hands. And that’s the word “onshore”. For the new 102-turbine, £1.2 billion windfarm which he opens today is not built on dry land, but 10 miles out to sea – at Walney, off the north Lancashire coast. So while the good people of Barrow-in-Furness can make out the rotor blades twirling around in the distance, they don’t have them towering over their back gardens like grim green giants. Indeed, at a time when the percentage of onshore windfarms being refused planning permission has been soaring from 29 per cent, in 2005, to 48 per cent today, the proposal to build offshore Walney (covering an area of 28 square miles) went through with barely a whimper.

“Compared with the kind of opposition you get when farmers want to make money by putting up turbines, there were minimal objections to Walney,” says Amy Fenton, of the Barrow-based North West Evening Mail. “It may not have created that many permanent jobs, but there is a widespread acceptance that offshore wind is going to play an important role, and that we are going to be a part of it here on the Energy Coast.”

And there are powerful forces behind this drift out to sea. A consortium of 14 different government and industry organisations, known as the Offshore Valuation Group, claims development of offshore windfarms could “unlock the electricity equivalent of one billion barrels of oil a year”, at the same time as creating 145,000 new UK jobs and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 1.1 billion tonnes by the year 2050.

And it’s not all hot air, either. The Danish company Dong Energy, which built the Walney windfarm in a record five and a half months, is already building three more offshore UK installations: one off the coast of Lincolnshire, one at West of Duddon Sands (near Walney), and another known as London Array, located 12 miles out into the Thames estuary, which, with an output of 630 megawatts, will put Walney’s 368 in the shade.

According to the industry body Renewable UK (“the voice of wind and marine energy”), there are 599 wind turbines currently being built, in addition to the 487 already operating. And if the Government gets its way, many more will follow. “Greening the economy isn’t just good for the planet,” declared Ed Davey last week. “It’s good for the wallets of every British citizen, too.”

Including the Queen, apparently. It turns out that ownership of the sea bed into which these windfarm foundations are being fixed lies with the monarch herself, or at least her agents, the Crown Estate. And in recent months, the Crown Estate has been engaged in an exercise known as Round Three; this has involved issuing licences for windfarm construction not just within waving distance of our coastline, but as many as 200 nautical miles out to sea. If all those projects get built, says Renewable UK, the offshore windpower output will rise from its present figure of 1,534 megawatts to a full-blown 40,000 megawatts.

Of course, the two big advantages of building a windfarm out at sea are first, that the neighbours don’t object, and second, that although the Crown Estate gives you a good grilling, you don’t have to go through the palaver of a full public planning inquiry.

That said, it’s not all plain sailing. Clearly, it’s harder and more expensive to construct wind turbines in 60ft to 100ft of frequently rough sea water than it is to build them up on a grassy hilltop. That much is reflected in the fact that, as well as paying the going rate for the megawatts you produce, the Government also pays an on-top premium (known as an ROC, or Renewables Obligation Certificate, which is twice as much for offshore as onshore-produced power. Then there are the nautical and environmental obstacles.

“The kind of thing we would object to would be building a windfarm in the middle of a seabird migratory route,” says Heather Duncan, of Natural England. “The same would apply if the construction site was in a recognised ‘loafing’ area where large numbers of seabirds gather to preen. Sometimes we will stipulate that mitigation procedures should be put in place. There is a windfarm under construction in Morecambe Bay, where the developers employ marine mammal spotters who give an alarm signal if a seal or dolphin is sighted, and the piling and drilling work has to stop immediately.”

Nevertheless, building windfarms at sea clearly has potential for being done on a bigger scale, and attracting less controversy, than, say Farmer Giles trying to trouser a quick £30,000 (the going rate in Cumbria) for planting turbines instead of turnips. Yes, the debates still rage about the efficiency of windpower; its opponents point out that the turbines rarely run at full capacity, while its proponents say the same applies to coal, gas and nuclear power stations. And while windfarms at sea stir up less ill feeling than those on land, environmental organisations maintain there’s room for both.

“We’re going to need a range of clean energy resources, including both onshore and offshore wind,” says Louise Hutchins, of Greenpeace. Paul Steedman, senior campaigner for Friends of the Earth, agrees. “Let’s face it, we’ve got some of the best wind in the world,” he says, not entirely in jest. “By 2030, we envisage offshore and onshore wind will be supplying more than half of our national electricity demand.”

With the armies of wind turbines now advancing across the hills at a slower rate and encountering stronger levels of opposition, it seems that the battles to build windfarms out at sea are not going to be fought half as fiercely as those on land. Indeed, with ever-increasing numbers of rotor blades thrusting up, like Neptune’s trident, through the azure waves, the next big eco-question must be this: is blue the new green?

The Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/9069267/Windfarms-An-ill-wind-of-change.html

Ed Davey throws weight behind green energy by opening giant UK windfarm

kleenergyecosystems — Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:09:08 +0000

• Walney farm off Cumbria, opening today, is world’s largest
• Move seen as clear pro-renewables gesture amid scepticism
• Britain ‘number one destination for investment in offshore wind’

Walney offshore windfarm off Cumbria under construction in 2010. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

The new energy secretary, Lib Dem MP Ed Davey, will face down the growing army of renewable power critics inside the coalition by making his first major outing a visit to a wind project.

He will open the world’s biggest offshore windfarm on Thursday – the £1.2bn Walney scheme, off Cumbria, with more than 100 turbines generating enough power for 320,000 homes.

Davey said: “Britain has a lot to be proud of in our growing offshore wind sector. Our island’s tremendous natural resource, our research base and a proud history of engineering make this the No 1 destination for investment in offshore wind.

“And Walney is the newest, biggest and fastest-built jewel in that crown, providing clean power for hundreds of thousands of households.

“Opening Walney during my first week in office lets me underline my commitment to continuing the coalition’s work to make this sector a success story for the British economy, not least with the innovation it is driving and the employment it is creating.”

It comes after 100 Conservative MPs wrote to David Cameron at the weekend calling for renewable energy subsidies to be cut – although their main concern was onshore turbines, which they accused of wrecking the countryside.

British power company SSE and Denmark’s Dong Energy say that Walney breaks a number of records: it has been built more cheaply and quickly than previous schemes, and has been supported by foreign pension funds.

Anders Eldrup, chief executive of Dong, the largest power company in Denmark and operator of the farm, said: “It marks a new era in terms of financing, being the first project in the UK backed by institutional investors. Walney is a landmark in offshore wind and [in] Dong Energy’s strong drive to further industrialise offshore wind power and cut costs.”

The new 367.2MW scheme, which will itself be dwarfed by the massive London Array off Kent when that eventually comes on-stream, is made up of two projects, Walney 1 and 2, off Barrow-in-Furness.

The company claims the second part of the scheme was the quickest-built of its kind, with all turbines and cables installed in less than six months, and that it has achieved considerable cost reductions at a time when critics claim offshore wind is too expensive.

The estimated £70bn outlay that is needed to greatly expand offshore wind capacity – the so-called “round three” of windfarm construction – is seen as dependent on attracting new forms of financing, so SSE and Dong are keen to trumpet their success at Walney.

OPW – a consortium of the Dutch pension fund PGGM and the energy investment fund Ampere – took a 24.8% stake in the project in December 2010, joining majority owner Dong Energy (50.1%) and SSE (25.1%).

“The partnership with PGGM and Ampere clearly demonstrates that institutional investors are willing to invest in well-structured offshore wind projects alongside market leading industry players,” said Eldrup.

Dong has around 30% of the offshore wind market throughout Europe and is regarded as a pioneer among utilities for its willingness to throw its weight behind renewables. The company has in the past taken 85% of its power from coal or oil and 15% from green sources, but Eldrup said he was determined to completely “twist” this around to 85% renewable and the rest from gas.

“We are targeting 50/50 by 2020 and I expect we can get there before then,” he said.

Dong is also an investor in the London Array – scheduled to bring its 630 turbines on stream by the end of this year – and is pioneering deepwater gas projects off the west of Shetland, working alongside Total of France.

The stance Davey takes at the energy department is seen as important at a time when the renewable industry is under pressure as governments throughout Europe cut back public spending. Chris Huhne, who resigned from the energy brief last week facing criminal charges over a driving incident, was a very vocal supporter of wind energy in a coalition government containing many sceptics. The less experienced Davey will be under pressure from environmentalists to show he is willing to take a similar stand.

He got off to a good start in the eyes of Greenpeace by making his first ministerial visit to a home energy efficiency centre last week in Watford.

On Wednesday, Davey launched a new offensive on energy wastage, with the creation of a dedicated team within the energy department to spearhead energy efficiency policy and make it more relevant to people’s everyday lives.

He announced details of the new Energy Efficiency Deployment Office (EEDO) at a meeting with industry leaders at the John Lewis Partnership’s Peter Jones store in Sloane Square, London.

In his first speech as secretary of state, Davey said: “I’m hugely enthusiastic about energy efficiency. It’s the cheapest way of cutting carbon – and cutting bills for consumers. It has to be right at the heart of what we do.

“EEDO will be a centre of expertise, challenging our work and making energy efficiency real and relevant to people’s everyday lives. Two out of three consumers think their home is wasting energy, but only one in three is going to do anything about it. That has to change. We need to get out there and show people what energy efficiency can really do for them.”

The Guardian

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/09/windfarm-worlds-biggest-cumbria?INTCMP=SRCH