Melting ice causes 1cm sea level rise in 7 years
According to The Independent, global sea levels have risen by 1.5mm a year in the 7 years from 2003 to 2010 according to new data released by NASA. The increased sea levels are as a result of 1,000 cubic metres of ice being lost from the poles, mountains and other ice sheets and on top of already known rises caused by thermal expansion.
The data comes from a pair of satellites jointly operated by NASA and the German government.
John Wahr, professor of physics at the University of Colorado at Boulder, who was part of the research team that analysed the satellite data commented:
"The Earth is losing an incredible amount of ice to the oceans annually, and these new results will help us to answer important questions in terms of both sea-level rise and how the planet's cold regions are responding to global change."
Large injections of fresh water are known to destabilise ocean currents including the North-Atlantic Conveyor leading some climate scientists to voice concerns over an increase of chaotic weather patterns.
FITs phase 2B review is brain dead
Last week HM Gov released the consultation document for next found of Feed In Tariff 'slashes'.
Clearly, this is now about saving money and no longer about encouraging the take-up of renewable technology. Specifically in the 100kW - 500Kw wind sector (although broadly true for higher) both the consultation and the research evidence (Parson Brinckerhoff) it cites admit that capex for larger wind is expected to continue to increase. This really should not be a surprise - wind turbines are large machines and require significant labour to put them up with no new "breakthrough" technology or mass production economies of scale around the corner. It is reasonable to expect iPods to get cheaper, but sadly not wind turbines.
In the summary of deployments so far, they note less than 15% of the predicted mid-wind installations were achieved. DECC suggest the reason wind targets have not been met are perhaps because land owners do not realise they can install wind turbines or fear it will make them too unpopular. How about, getting planning permission for wind turbines in this country is akin to playing the lottery but where the ticket can set you back £50,000 (often a lot more) and the draw might not be for 12 months.
When you dig a little deeper, the research that DECC undertook in order to determine future prices of wind turbines amounted to ringing a handful of micro-turbine suppliers for an informal quote. Pure genius.
So, given targets have not been met, and the costs are indeed rising - what DECC propose is staggeringly, breathtakingly stupid.... a 3.2p/kWh (15.5%) cut. Worse still they further propose to reduce the tariff by a minimum 5% per year from 2014 onwards.
Collectively we in the West have polluted and poisoned for free, now its time to start paying for the clean up. If you want a green revolution - it does not come free.
In the past we have broadly supported the efforts of the Coalition Government, sadly they are no longer walking-the-walk, just talking-the-talk. Despite brave words from Cleggy & Davey the 101 Tories might have their wicked way after all.
UK emissions jump by 3.1%
New figures show a sudden jump of 18 million tonnes of extra greenhouse gas emissions from the UK. According the a report in the Guardian:
Virtually all of the rest of the leap in the UK's carbon emissions comes from technical problems forcing nuclear power stations to shut down. The biggest reactor in the country, Sizewell B, was offline for six months, meaning more coal and gas had to be burned to fill the electricity gap, pumping more climate-warming gases into the air. Other reactors had problems too in 2010 and more recently events as varied as a rogue school of jellyfish and winter tornadoes have closed atomic energy plants.
When a wind turbine explodes, as in a recent storm, a megwatt of power is lost. When a nuclear plant falls off the grid, 1000 megawatts is lost. The comparison puts the lie to the sceptics charge that wind power is "unreliable".
Proof that with no new nuclear reactors on the horizon, plugging the "hole" with coal and gas will be disastrous.
Coalition stands firm despite attempted "green revolt"
Yesterday, deputy PM Nick Clegg took the opportunity to deliver a firm rebuttal to the attempted "Green Revolt" of the weekend. Introducing Ed Davey as the new Climate Secretary, Mr Clegg said:
"The race is on to lead the world in clean, green energy. Last year we saw record-breaking global investment in renewables, outstripping the cash piled into fossil fuels. The new economic powerhouses – China, India, Korea, Brazil – are now serious contenders for that capital. In today's world, the savviest states understand that going for growth means going green. Low-carbon markets are the next frontier in the battle for global pre-eminence. I want the UK to be the number one destination for green investment. We're in this race to win it."
Laura Sandys, a Tory MP who supports wind power, said:
"Wind often gets a bad press but actually it costs the average UK household only £10 a year and generates electricity 80% of the time. Onshore, offshore, marine, solar, waste to energy should all form part of our mixed energy economy. As a collective, these technologies have the capability to help guard families across the country against energy price shocks."
Yesterday we reported on the cynical nature of the MPs complaints about the (relatively small) £400m annual subsidy to wind energy. Here's another specific example: MP Simon Revell signed the letter even though engineering firm David Brown recently won a contract with Samsung to develop.... wind turbine technology in his constituency.
When Vestas pulled out of their Isle of Wight factory it was the local MP who bemoaned the decision, despite being a vocal opponent to several wind turbine applications on the island.
"Cake" and "Eat it" spring to mind.
The timing of revolt may also have led Vestas to have second thoughts about developing the new multi-million pound turbine assembly plant in Kent. Kent County Council officials have been scurrying over to Denmark in an attempt to patch things up.
Cynical Tory MPs attack wind
So the Telegraph reports that 101 Tory MPs have written to David Cameron complaining about on-shore wind power. Within the first half page of the story the contradictions are clear to anyone with a few brain cells to spare.
The primary complaint seems to be that on-shore wind turbine subsidy is too expensive at a time when the economy is struggling. No mention that off-shore wind is around three times more expensive to produce. No mention that on-shore wind is the cheapest renewable energy source on a £/kW basis. No mention of DECC data that shows increases in underlying fossil fuel prices are pushing up bills much faster than renewables. No mention of massive and record quarterly profits being made by the likes of Exxon Mobile ($9.4bn) or BP ($5.1bn) and certainly no mention of the billions of pounds that will need to be spent on climate change mitigation methods resulting from the use of fossil fuels.
Tracey Crouch, said: “It is tragic that we blight our countryside with hideous electricity pylons and now we intend not only to do the same with onshore wind farms but also to subsidise them."
So pylons are ugly and we should bury electricity cabling? Any idea how much that would cost? There are around 88,000 pylons in the UK and National Grid price underground cabling at £20m per kilometre.
So just be aware, the people who are telling you wind power is too expensive are the same ones what would advocate ripping out all the pylons at huge expense. As for the staggering subsidy of £522m - for this the UK gets a new industry that employs thousands of skilled workers and clean low carbon energy.
What did we get for the tens of BILLIONS used to bail out the bankers?
No, the answer is clear. Big oil is running scared of renewables and is lobbying hard to put the brakes on. Meanwhile the Tories have been spotted their chance to derail Coalition policy with the untimely demise of Chris Huhne.
Defra report on risks of climate change
Yet more evidence to nail into the coffins of the climate-change-deniers... this time it is the Climate Change Risk Assessment published by Defra (Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs).
The 2,000 page document reports that flooding, heatwaves and water shortages are set to become most likely.
- Hotter summers with an expected 580-5900 extra deaths by the 2050's
- Damage from flooding likely to increase by £2bn-£12bn by the 2080's
On a positive note, the report mentions new shipping routes through the Arctic would result from melting sea ice - although this is obviously not good news for the wildlife that depends on it.
While the report notes the difficulty of making accurate predictions, the very fact of its existence signals that the Government is at last starting to take concrete steps in preparing for Climate Change.
2012 off to a windy start..
According to Renewables UK, 2012 started where 2011 left off - very windy. On December 28th UK wind plant generated 12.2% of UK power, beating the previous record of 10%.
During the period covering December 1st to January 5th approximately 5% of UK generation came from wind.
The carbon cost of wind
A comment was recently passed to us from a planning authority regarding one of our wind turbine applications. A member of the public had asked what the carbon cost of a wind turbine was in comparison to the claimed savings.
To answer this we first need to assess the relative "costs" of energy generating technologies. A 2011 Government report gives us the following numbers which represent the amount of CO2 released during the manufacture, delivery, installation, operation and decommissioning of each major technology expressed in grams of CO2 per kwh generated:
| Technology | Lifetime Cost in gCO2/kWh |
| Nuclear | 5 to 7 |
| Wind | 5 to 20 (includes micro, onshore & offshore) |
| Wave/Tidal | 12 to 39 |
| Solar PV | 75 to 116 |
| Biomass | 60 to 550 |
| Gas | 365 to 488 |
| Oil | 650 |
| Coal | 786 to 990 (includes use of carbon capture & storage) |
The particular wind turbine in question (a Vestas V52 on 74m tower) with an average windspeed of 6.8m/s should be on the lower range of costs associated with wind energy, but for fairness we will choose a value a 10gCO2/kwh. Annual generation output is predicted to be around 2,000MWh.
So the total lifecycle CO2 "cost" can be calculated as below:
2,000,000 (kWh) x 20 (years) x 10 (gCO2/kWh) = 400 metric tonnes of CO2
Now let's look at the total lifecycle CO2 "saving" by calculating the CO2 released if we were to produce the same amount of electricity using existing UK powerplant. The Government publish the CO2 cost of UK grid electricity as 540gCO2/kWh, so the calculation is:
2,000,000 (kWh) x 20 (years) x 540 (gCO2/kWh) = 21,600 metric tonnes of CO2
Put another way, the turbine will yield an equivalent CO2 saving of 1,080 tonnes per year. So its quite easy to see that it will account for its entire lifecyle CO2 emissions in less than 6 months of operation.
This is why wind turbines are so popular, in UK and even more so abroad.
NPPF Update
Towards the end of December 2011 the House of Commons Select Committee for Communities and Local Government published their report on the Draft National Planning Policy Framework or NPPF.
While their findings may not be quite as rosy as the interpretation chosen by minister Greg Clarke they are none the less far from damning. For the most part the debate seems to have evolved around the definition of Sustainable Development - because, says the NPPF, planning authorities should have a default presumption in favour of them.
Just about everyone has commented on the definition of Sustainable Development, but the one proposed by the committee seems to address many of the concerns of both sides:
Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of existing communities and future generations to meet their own needs. It is central to the economic, environmental and social success of the country both that these three aspects of development are addressed positively and equally and that planning both serves to protect and to enhance and add value to the environment. This is the core principle underpinning planning.
Policies in plans and decisions on development should be assessed against the principles that the nation and areas within it should live within their environmental limits; should achieve a sustainable economy and should seek to ensure a strong, healthy and just society.
The achievement of sustainable development through planning should be based on the responsible use of a sound evidence base and developed through an open and democratic system
Naturally we believe there is a very strong case that renewable energy projects, and in particular onshore wind projects, are sustainable development not least because they:
- Reduce CO2 emissions and therefore help mitigate the effects of Climate Change
- Reduce the increasing dependence on imported fossil fuels
- Reduce the cost of household electricity bills as fossil fuel costs continue to rise and eventually surpass those of renewable sources
- Provide valuable local income via extra employment and community reward schemes
- Promote the development of community owned schemes where local residents benefit financially from decentralised energy generation
DG001 Commissioned and generating!
Another milestone event today – our first turbine in Hampshire is now generating!