UK's faith in nuclear power threatens renewables, says German energy expert

[martin]

Which alters not a jot that we desperately need decisions biased towards the good of the environment - as the present government demonstrated this afternoon, pretty much all green measures have been sacrificed in a quest for "growth at all costs", which to my mind should preclude the lot of them from even being allowed to administer their own dinner money, let alone governing us!
I'll cheerfully admit to being prejudiced against nukes (born from many decades of having lived with the damn things), I feel that way for perfectly good reasons - many in government are intoning the "nukes will save us" mantra, yet only 5 years ago nukes were firmly off the agenda, so I'll cheerfully welcome anyone who has the ability to notice the nuclear king's clothes are non-existent (whatever their educational or career background). What has been suggested is actually "self governance" by vested interests  - probably the very worst way to ensure the planet stays habitable!

[zeus]

 
... I do note the following with a really big grin on my face "so I'll cheerfully welcome anyone who has the ability to notice the nuclear king's clothes are non-existent", especially so from one who openly supports generation using windpower .... if there was to be a 'king's clothes' poll for nuclear vs wind, I'd be pretty certain which one would likely be deemed to be appropriately dressed .....    

[martin]

thanks to all the eejits that actually believe the guff pumped out by likes of the odious Delingpole and Melanie Philips you may be right
I have done the costings for "medium wind", and can assure you that it really does both pay, and pay back - probably the wrong forum to start slagging off the viability of "wind", whatever your opinions of nuclear power.... we know it works! (as long as it's correctly positioned, and not on a roof)

[zeus]

... definately not 'slagging off the viability of "wind"', actually far from it, just establishing the point that nuclear reactors generally tend to wear a thicker overcoat than wind turbines and as such, being a fully schedulable resource, should be considered to be part of the overall generation mix until someone 'clever' comes up with, and builds, a viable and affordable long term energy storage technology to cope with the periods of non-generation for wind and other renewables ..... wind without storage is far closer to being a 'King's clothes' scenario than nuclear, the problem being that the storage element is the missing clothing .....

[billi]

I guess us off gridders  , we have a Nuclear power plant in the shed  as well   cause system would not work  without       

Funny that    so  many have problems to see the viability of 100 % renewables    , but you will be surprised how fast  it will develop 
and storage/buffer  for them  to grant a  balanced supply  will be sorted 

One idea is  http://www.uni-kassel.de/upress/online/frei/978-3-89958-798-2.volltext.frei.pdf

Renewable Power Methane

Abstract
The two major challenges in global energy systems are to reduce energy-related
greenhouse gas emissions and to maintain energy supply security. This thesis presents
one solution to both problems. It proposes strategies for the transformation of current
energy systems into 100% renewable, stable and almost emission-free energy systems
without making use of nuclear energy or carbon capture and storage.
Within renewable energy systems, one is facing two difficulties: On the one hand, the
fluctuating renewable sources need to be matched with the energy demand, on the other
hand, a substitution for high energy density fuels in heat and transport has to be found.
Therefore, this thesis examines bioenergy and the newly developed ‘renewable power
methane’ or ‘renewable methane’ concerning their potential to solve these problems.
First, bioenergy is analyzed in the broader context of climate change, energy systems
and land use in order to estimate the sustainable potential of global bioenergy. Then, a
techno-economic and ecologic analysis of 78 bioenergy pathways is done in order to
identify the strategic role of bioenergy in future energy systems. The potential is linked
with this analysis to identify the range of maximum greenhouse gas reduction potential
of bioenergy (2.5-16 Gt CO2-eq. yr-1). Due to land-use competition and emissions from
land-use, residues are to be favored as biomass source over energy crops. However, the
limited bioenergy potential will neither be sufficient to balance fluctuating renewable
power nor to fully replace fossil fuels in heat and transport.
Second, to solve this bioenergy bottleneck, a new approach of converting renewable
power into methane via hydrogen and CO2 methanation is developed. Several integrated
concepts with CO2 from air, biomass, and fossil fuels are designed. In this way,
renewable power can be stored in the natural gas network and used temporarily and
spatially flexible for balancing power, for process heat and for long-distance
transportation. It can be produced basically anywhere where water, air and renewable
power are available and thus decrease import dependence on fossil fuels. It can recycle
CO2 in the energy system or even act as carbon sink in combination with CO2 storage.
Third, the necessary transformation of energy systems is performed. The key elements
are direct renewable power generation, renewable electromobility, heat pumps,
renewable power methane and overcoming traditional biomass. By integrating smart
power networks, heat networks and natural gas networks, a full renewable energy
supply is possible. Several 100% renewable energy systems are developed, reducing
global energy-related emissions by 95%. The 100% renewable power supply was
simulated with an hourly resolution. Finally, the role of such a transformation in global
climate protection is analyzed. It has to take place until 2050 in order to limit global
warming to 2°C.
Therefore, there is not much time left for the transformation to start..................

........................................

4. Renewable Power Methane – solution for renewable
power integration and energy storage
4.1 Challenges in renewable energy systems - balancing power,
energy storage and special transport segments
Challenge balancing power – bioenergy is not sufficient
The main challenge of renewable energy supply is to match the available energy with the
energy demand in time, place and quantity. High shares of fluctuating renewable power
from wind and solar energy will shape future energy supply. Storage of renewables is a
key element in sustainable energy structures. About 20% of total power generation will
be required as balancing power to ensure technical supply security and stability of grid
operation (Czisch, 2005). So far, mostly fossil power plants and hydro power serve this
function. Nuclear power plants are neither designed for fast ramp up and downs nor
economic in intermittent operation; plus technical and security challenges remain
unsolved. Large base load power plants are incompatible with high shares of renewable
energy to a large extent (SRU, 2009b). As fossil fuels are finite, today’s power plant
structure is incompatible with future power supply dominated by renewables and the
potential of hydro power is limited, other options for balancing power are necessary.
Bioenergy is storable and can thus provide balancing power, which is one of its strategic
functions (chapter 3.2.1.2). Yet, bioenergy fulfills other strategic functions on one side
and on the other side, its potential is limited, too. Using the maximum estimated
economic bioenergy potential of 150 EJ yr-1 for 2050 in power generation with a
conversion efficiency of 25% (average value of examined 39 CHP pathways in chapter
2.2), 37 EJ yr-1 or about 10,000 TWh yr-1 balancing power can be generated from
biomass in theory, neglecting the fact that there will be demand for biofuels and
biomaterials.
Global electricity generation has grown on average by 3.5% in the last decade and is
currently about 20,000 TWh yr-1 (BP, 2009). Assuming continuous growth rates of
2.5% until 2050, the electricity demand rises up to 55,000 TWh. However, by assuming
all efficiency improvements proposed in chapter 5, the global annual electricity demand
could be limited to 18,000 TWh. Additionally, surplus power will be required for
powering electromobility and heat pumps. The electrification of the heating and the
transport sector will require another 35,000 TWh yr-1 in addition to conventional power
demand, according to the scenario in chapter 5.3.3. Thus, the total electricity demand
results in a bandwidth of 53,000 - 90,000 TWh with and without efficiency measures.
Bioenergy will therefore not be able to provide the necessary balancing power for grid
stability in energy systems with major shares of wind and solar energy; i.e. an energy
system that shifts towards renewable power as main energy source.
Challenges in renewable energy systems - balancing power, energy storage and special transport segments
105
Challenge energy storage – current storage systems are limited
In addition to what has been described so far, large amounts of surplus power will be
available as wind and solar power generation will exceed often the actual power
demand. Energy has to be ‘shifted’ from periods of high renewable generation and low
power demand to times of low renewable generation and high power demand
(Mackensen et al., 2008). Although electrical networks will be extended and grid
operation will be optimized by enhanced energy and load management, new energy
storage capacities will be required as balancing and reserve / backup power (DENA,
2005; von Bremen, 2009). Today, only pumped hydro and compressed air storage
systems are capable for storing large amounts of electricity. Both storage systems are
limited geographically and have a limited range, i.e. are operated as short-term storage
in daily periods (Leonhard et al., 2008). In Germany for example, the installed capacity
of pumped hydro lasts for about 6 hours. Batteries are used for uninterruptible power
supply, but only few electrochemical storage devices are in general suitable for largescale
power storage and again a short-term storage option (Oertel, 2008). Sodiumsulphur
(NaS) accumulators are applied in medium scale (34 MW) in Japan but face
high cost (NGK, 2008). Electromobility as storage option is as well limited and only
suitable as short-term option. In theory, a full electrical fleet in Germany (45 million
cars with 10 kWhel storage capacity) could supply 70 GW for about 6 hours.
The necessity to bridge two weeks of wind calms can only be met by long-term storage
facilities. So far, the only option available for this purpose was hydrogen. However,
hydrogen as storage option is limited due to high costs, security challenges, missing
infrastructure and short lifetimes of fuel cells. The gas network is the largest existing
storage facility with proven and available technology (Cerbe, 2008). It has a capacity of
hundreds of TWh and is therefore able to bridge the gap of weather periods with zero or
low renewable energy availability; enabling a seasonal storage of renewable energy.
Covering energy segments that require fuels with high-energy density
The transport sector depends heavily on crude oil (Boerrigter et al., 2004).
Electromobility can replace much of it, but some segments like aviation, navigation, and
heavy-duty transport require fuels with high energy density. Liquid biofuels can serve
for this function and replace fossil fuels, but its potential is limited. Converting the
maximum economic bioenergy potential of 150 EJ yr-1 for 2050 into biofuels with a
conversion efficiency of 45% (average value of examined 25 CHP pathways in chapter
2.2) results in 67 EJ yr-1 energy from biofuels. Currently, the total transport energy
demand is about 160 EJ yr-1 and expected to rise (chapter 5). Therefore, bioenergy is
and will not be sufficient to replace all fossil fuels for global transport energy demand.
In the long term, the most important function of biomass is to provide carbon-feedstock
for the chemical industry to produce biomaterials (chapter 3.2.1). The need for a highenergy
density fuel, which shows the same benefits as fossil or biofuels but not their
drawbacks, is obvious.

[smegal]

No Billi,

You have a large battery bank. With probably a few hundred kg of lead in it.

I am doing a LOT of research into energy storage at the moment and when someone finds a method that is cost effective and does not require polluting materials, doesn't take up vast amounts of space let me know.

[billi]

Smegal

the more PV i get the less lead i need    

Perhaps read my attached file , have not read it completely my self   , but you are on a research mission so   please go ahead  

Here is a  illustration  of  how much Methane  could be produced per hectare per year    from:
 one hectare Windturbines
 one hectare PV
one hectare  Maize



Can you show me a  technology that is comparable  fast in declining costs   like PV ?  And can you show me a technology that is able to be installed in a few month     even in your  GW size  http://newscontent.cctv.com/news.jsp?fileId=120151



Edit : "per hectare per year" was modified  by me/billi

[smegal]

Smegal

the more PV i get the less lead i need   

 

And for the winter.

oh you have a hydro turbine, like the rest of the developed world.

Honesty do you really beleive that the off grid model can be scaled to a national level.

We need some large scale thermal power plants. I genuinely beleive that nuclear is a better option than coal!

I agree on the biomethane front but it isn't scaleable to the GW scale. A GW is a hard amount to comprehend.

[martin]

There's also another thing that's dismissed by "pro nukers" which is that we have become accustomed to "always on" power supplies, allowing us to grow into wasteful ways - as has been pointed out, intelligent use of power (use it when you've got it) can be incredibly simple and cheap to implement, and allows the abundance of energy from intermittent sources such as wind to be used without the need for storage (rather like the old millers did....) - what we need is imagination, innovation, and a healthy scepticism about the empty promises from the nuclear lobby (we're one of the few countries where there is a rosy view of the technology!), and acceptance of the fact we need to be looking at hefty cuts in consumption, not more ways to continue our profligate energy use....

[billi]

oh you have a hydro turbine, like the rest of the developed world.

Honesty do you really beleive that the off grid model can be scaled to a national level.

We need some large scale thermal power plants. I genuinely beleive that nuclear is a better option than coal!

No   and yes   , why do you ask ?  i mean the whole world is off grid    or is there an umbilical cord  to God ? with unlimited supply ?

Surely , nearly everything else is better than coal , but again,  betting  on a radioactive horse will  pull / hold back  other ideas

 definitely  my choice , if i would start a career in energy  today , would be far away from nuclear suits  with linked bank-accounts  

and enjoy new ideas

Billi

[Antman]

Why does nobody seem to mention tidal power?

Surely it's the way to go. It does not stop when the sun goes in, nor when the wind stops blowing and is unliklely to spontaneously combust in an earthquake....

Does anyone have any figures on production capability of tidal vs availability area of suitable coastal sites?

Antman

[rondurrans]

Try:-

http://www.bwea.com/pdf/marine/FINAL%20WHY%20MARINE.pdf
http://www.bwea.com/pdf/publications/WandT_SoI_report.pdf
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/meeting_energy/renewable_ener/re_roadmap/re_roadmap.aspx
http://www.wavegen.co.uk/pdf/art.1727.pdf
http://www.worldenergy.org/documents/ser_2010_report_1.pdf
http://www.withouthotair.com/synopsis10.pdf

[smegal]

Unfortunately wave and tidal are still in their infancy.

Wave power either uses inordinate amounts of concrete, has high costs or rips itself apart.

Tidal stream technology has similar limitations to wave, the turbines deem to have short lifespans.

Tidal barrages are interesting but have potential ecological risks, not to mention extremely high costs. The La Rance scheme in France is interesting though.

[DaveSnafu]

Of course we need nuke power stations...how on earth are we gonna load all the new missiles and submarines we have ordered that won,t be ready for 25 years, the people who are in charge of these things know that electricity is a by product of reactors, the real money/power is in the bombs.
As for lead acid batteries, mine were second hand when I got em, I have had them 7 years, lead is the most recycled metal on the planet, they very conveniently come wrapped in plastic to keep all that nasty stuff inside and safe, they are as far as I am aware unaffected by stuxnet interference from "friendly" nations.
Off grid might not work on a national scale but its a start.
All this wringing of the hands about how to power our nation......I think we put too much faith in the powers that be, it should be obvious to anyone now that they do not have the best interests of the nation at heart.
I don,t trust any of these idiots making the decisions, thats why we are off grid.

[martin]

"I think we put too much faith in the powers that be, it should be obvious to anyone now that they do not have the best interests of the nation at heart.
I don,t trust any of these idiots making the decisions, thats why we are off grid"