www.upi.com
7 May 2012
CASTLEBAR, Ireland, May 7 (UPI)--Transmission system operator EirGrid has announced a $314 million program to upgrade Western Ireland's network with the aim of exporting "green" energy. EirGrid Chief Executive Dermot Byrne introduced the project Friday in Castlebar, County Mayo, in an event attended by Irish Taoiseach Enda Kenny, Minister for Energy Pat Rabbitte and other political leaders, who talked up the potential of exporting wind, wave and tidal energy to Britain. Byrne said the project, known as Grid West, is part of a larger, nationwide effort called Grid25, which seeks the upgrading of Ireland's transmission capabilities to accommodate the country's "access to a secure and competitive energy supply".
"This major initiative will put in place a safe, secure and affordable electricity supply throughout Ireland", Byrne said. "It is a major undertaking which will take several years and represents an investment of ($4.2 billion). "The Grid West project is the one of the largest single Grid25 projects and the most significant in the west, initially accounting for ($314 million) of the investment earmarked for the region". Kenny said that under the Grid West plan, a pair of 400 kilovolt transmission lines would be built linking Bellacorick in County Mayo to Cashla in County Galway and Flagford in County Roscommon in a move to tap Western Ireland's "huge" renewable energy potential.
"The West of Ireland is particularly rich in renewable energy resources and has the potential for much job creation", Kenny said. "Harnessing and exploiting this resource for Ireland will require detailed planning involving high levels of engagement between communities and EirGrid that will allow the construction of critical infrastructure for the benefit of the West and for Ireland". Rabbitte said planning applications under Ireland's Strategic Infrastructure Act are expected in 2015, The Irish Times reported.
The energy minister said he disagreed with critics who say the grid upgrades are ill-timed because the ongoing economic recession is depressing demand for power. "The abundance of renewable resources on our western seaboard holds the promise for us to actually achieve the huge challenge of moving away from fossil fuels in the longer term", he said. "Investment decisions for the necessary trans-European infrastructure up to 2030 must be taken now, as a significant amount of older generation plant will need to be replaced and more interconnected transmission systems need to be developed". Also on the horizon is the promise of Britain as a potential customer of green Irish energy at a time when that nation is facing the ends of the useful lives of some of its fossil fuel and nuclear generating plants.
"We are in discussions with the British government", Rabbitte told the newspaper. "It hasn't happened in this fashion between two member states of the European Union before. A prerequisite is an intergovernmental agreement and we are working on the elements of that". Dublin in addition to the Grid25 program is working on "essential" north-south transmission reinforcements and the completion of an east-west interconnector, which will link its electric system with that of Britain's. Ireland's national goal is to meet 40% of electricity demand from renewable sources by 2020, including wind, wave and tidal energy. The government and EirGrid say the existing transmission infrastructure in the region needs "substantial investment" to accommodate West of Ireland's "increasing levels of renewable generation".
Showing posts with label Interconnector. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Interconnector. Show all posts
Thursday, 17 May 2012
Wednesday, 4 April 2012
Gas could be just as dirty as coal, study reveals
www.smh.com.au
28 Mar 2012
Coal seam gas, widely touted as a greener fuel than coal, could have just as deep a carbon footprint unless world-class standards are used when extracting the gas from the ground, an expert report has found.
A study into the life-cycle greenhouse emissions of Australia's energy sources by consultancy WorleyParsons found conventional gas from large offshore wells typically produced 38% less greenhouse emissions than black coal, largely because it burnt more cleanly.
But the equation could shift dramatically for the fledgling coal seam gas industry-the subject of a fierce political battle in NSW and Queensland-if meticulous standards were not followed when the gas was extracted from the ground.
So-called ''fugitive emissions'', particularly of methane, which is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO₂, can tip the balance and make coal seam gas as dirty a fuel source as black coal burnt in ageing power plants, the report says.
''If methane leakage approaches the elevated levels recently reported in some US gas fields,.. the [greenhouse gas] intensity of CSG,.. generation is on a par with sub-critical coal-fired generation,'' the report states.
The lead author, Paul Hardisty, said in a statement: ''The implications for regulators and the emerging Australian CSG industry are that best practice applied to design, construction and operation of projects can significantly reduce emissions, lower financial liabilities under the carbon tax, and help make CSG a less GHG-intensive fuel option.''
More…
28 Mar 2012
Coal seam gas, widely touted as a greener fuel than coal, could have just as deep a carbon footprint unless world-class standards are used when extracting the gas from the ground, an expert report has found.
A study into the life-cycle greenhouse emissions of Australia's energy sources by consultancy WorleyParsons found conventional gas from large offshore wells typically produced 38% less greenhouse emissions than black coal, largely because it burnt more cleanly.
But the equation could shift dramatically for the fledgling coal seam gas industry-the subject of a fierce political battle in NSW and Queensland-if meticulous standards were not followed when the gas was extracted from the ground.
So-called ''fugitive emissions'', particularly of methane, which is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than CO₂, can tip the balance and make coal seam gas as dirty a fuel source as black coal burnt in ageing power plants, the report says.
''If methane leakage approaches the elevated levels recently reported in some US gas fields,.. the [greenhouse gas] intensity of CSG,.. generation is on a par with sub-critical coal-fired generation,'' the report states.
The lead author, Paul Hardisty, said in a statement: ''The implications for regulators and the emerging Australian CSG industry are that best practice applied to design, construction and operation of projects can significantly reduce emissions, lower financial liabilities under the carbon tax, and help make CSG a less GHG-intensive fuel option.''
More…
Tuesday, 27 March 2012
UK-Norway power link wins EU study grant
www.reuters.com
20 Mar 2012
(Reuters)-NorthConnect, a consortium planning to lay an electricity interconnector cable between Britain and Norway, on Tuesday won funding from the European Union to conduct a preliminary study on the 1,400 MW link, it said. The partners received 690,000 euros ($913,700) as part of European Union plans to work toward integrating the continent's electricity network, estimated to cost at least 140 billion euros over the coming decade.
Britain is currently linked to France, Ireland and the Netherlands through cables with a combined capacity of 3,500 MWs ( MW). The interconnector between Britain and Norway, due in operation before 2020, will be the first to link the UK's electricity network with Scandinavia.
"Furthermore it will facilitate the development of renewable generation in both regions, as the high penetration of wind generation in UK and hydroelectric-energy in Scandinavia complement each other", the consortium said in a statement.
NorthConnect is owned by Vattenfall, ECO2 Energi, Agder Energi (AE), Lyse and SSE Interconnector Limited. According to Vattenfall, a landing point around Peterhead in northeast Scotland has been identified, while a landing point in Norway will be assessed shortly.
20 Mar 2012
(Reuters)-NorthConnect, a consortium planning to lay an electricity interconnector cable between Britain and Norway, on Tuesday won funding from the European Union to conduct a preliminary study on the 1,400 MW link, it said. The partners received 690,000 euros ($913,700) as part of European Union plans to work toward integrating the continent's electricity network, estimated to cost at least 140 billion euros over the coming decade.
Britain is currently linked to France, Ireland and the Netherlands through cables with a combined capacity of 3,500 MWs ( MW). The interconnector between Britain and Norway, due in operation before 2020, will be the first to link the UK's electricity network with Scandinavia.
"Furthermore it will facilitate the development of renewable generation in both regions, as the high penetration of wind generation in UK and hydroelectric-energy in Scandinavia complement each other", the consortium said in a statement.
NorthConnect is owned by Vattenfall, ECO2 Energi, Agder Energi (AE), Lyse and SSE Interconnector Limited. According to Vattenfall, a landing point around Peterhead in northeast Scotland has been identified, while a landing point in Norway will be assessed shortly.
Tuesday, 31 January 2012
Solar guru receives Australia Day honour
www.abc.net.au
26 Jan 2012
Australia needs to look to Germany if it is to realise the potential of solar cell technology, says an expert who is being honoured today. Professor Martin Green of the University of New South Wales has been made a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) for his work on photovoltaics. "Germany has been the only country that's had a sensible long-term program in place to promote the use of renewables", says Green.
Some argue solar cells are not a competitive option for reducing carbon emissions, and are limited by the fact that they don't generate energy unless the Sun is shining. But according to Green, the "stars are aligning for conventional roof mounted solar" and it is ripe for a new kick start from governments.
Cheaper technology
Green says the cost of solar cells has come down rapidly in recent years largely due to the expanding manufacturing industry in China. "They're now a third to a quarter of the costs of only a couple of years ago", he says. "It's expected that this [decline in price] will continue over the next decade. The projections are that about 60% further will be taken off the costs over that period".
The German experience Green says the advantage of solar cells is they produce most of their energy in the day when energy use is at its highest. While clouds can cut back solar power production, this can be compensated for by energy from other areas that are sunny-as long as the grid covers a large enough geographic area, he says. Green points to data from Germany where nearly one million (mainly rooftop) solar panels supply the equivalent of a dozen nuclear power plants, or about 40% of the maximum demand in Australia. "When you average across the whole country you get a very predictable daily output", he says.
Balancing generation and use
Green says matching the generation of energy with its use is an old issue that the grid has found ways of accommodating. "You just slightly change perspective when you are generating most of your power during the day time [as you would with a system involving photovoltaics]", he says. Green says current day coal and nuclear power stations push out energy all night, when it's not particularly needed. As a result there is a need to store excess energy produced at night or for incentives to encourage energy use during this time.
"We give away electricity to aluminium smelters at night just to provide a load for the power plants at night", says Green. He says in countries like Japan, Germany and the US, excess energy from conventional power plants is currently used to pump water uphill at night for hydroelectricity. Generation of excess energy from photovoltaic cells during the day could be dealt with in a similar way, says Green. Local storage of energy from photovoltaics in batteries is also starting to occur, he says.
Feed-in tariffs
Green says Australian state-based schemes to promote rooftop solar have been undermined by fixed feed-in tariffs. Instead, a sliding tariff scale of the kind used in Germany, which progressively reduces subsidies to solar power and drives down the cost of solar panels, is more sustainable. "The German scheme has been undoubtedly successful", says Green.
"It has single-handedly driven the world market for both wind and solar products and changed the industry from non-viable to the state it is now where it has the chance of being self-sustaining". He says a carbon tax in Australia will only encourage lowest-cost present day low-emission alternatives. The tax should be complemented by German-style schemes to boost photovoltaics, which are presently at a low stage of development but have the potential to lower costs in the future.
Efficiency and sustainability
Green's research team currently holds the record for highly efficient solar cell technology, which has been commercialised through CSG Solar Pty Ltd, of which he is research director. Green says current silicon cells show 25% efficiency in the lab, although commercially available panels operate at just 14 to 15%. His team is working with several companies to improve this efficiency.
He says the thermodynamic limit of converting sunlight into electricity is 74%, and at this point, the best lab device reaches 36% using cells made from exotic materials. Green says the energy being used to make solar cells is also reducing. "Everything that is being done to reduce the cost of the cells also reduces the energy content", he says.
And he says the industry is moving away from the use of toxic chemicals that require expensive disposal, with pollution from solar cell production becoming the exception. "Of the hundreds of manufacturers in China there have been two of them in the last five years that have been found to be not disposing of the wastes of the processing of the silicon for the cells in an acceptable way".
26 Jan 2012
Australia needs to look to Germany if it is to realise the potential of solar cell technology, says an expert who is being honoured today. Professor Martin Green of the University of New South Wales has been made a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) for his work on photovoltaics. "Germany has been the only country that's had a sensible long-term program in place to promote the use of renewables", says Green.Some argue solar cells are not a competitive option for reducing carbon emissions, and are limited by the fact that they don't generate energy unless the Sun is shining. But according to Green, the "stars are aligning for conventional roof mounted solar" and it is ripe for a new kick start from governments.
Cheaper technology
Green says the cost of solar cells has come down rapidly in recent years largely due to the expanding manufacturing industry in China. "They're now a third to a quarter of the costs of only a couple of years ago", he says. "It's expected that this [decline in price] will continue over the next decade. The projections are that about 60% further will be taken off the costs over that period".
The German experience Green says the advantage of solar cells is they produce most of their energy in the day when energy use is at its highest. While clouds can cut back solar power production, this can be compensated for by energy from other areas that are sunny-as long as the grid covers a large enough geographic area, he says. Green points to data from Germany where nearly one million (mainly rooftop) solar panels supply the equivalent of a dozen nuclear power plants, or about 40% of the maximum demand in Australia. "When you average across the whole country you get a very predictable daily output", he says.
Balancing generation and use
Green says matching the generation of energy with its use is an old issue that the grid has found ways of accommodating. "You just slightly change perspective when you are generating most of your power during the day time [as you would with a system involving photovoltaics]", he says. Green says current day coal and nuclear power stations push out energy all night, when it's not particularly needed. As a result there is a need to store excess energy produced at night or for incentives to encourage energy use during this time.
"We give away electricity to aluminium smelters at night just to provide a load for the power plants at night", says Green. He says in countries like Japan, Germany and the US, excess energy from conventional power plants is currently used to pump water uphill at night for hydroelectricity. Generation of excess energy from photovoltaic cells during the day could be dealt with in a similar way, says Green. Local storage of energy from photovoltaics in batteries is also starting to occur, he says.
Feed-in tariffs
Green says Australian state-based schemes to promote rooftop solar have been undermined by fixed feed-in tariffs. Instead, a sliding tariff scale of the kind used in Germany, which progressively reduces subsidies to solar power and drives down the cost of solar panels, is more sustainable. "The German scheme has been undoubtedly successful", says Green.
"It has single-handedly driven the world market for both wind and solar products and changed the industry from non-viable to the state it is now where it has the chance of being self-sustaining". He says a carbon tax in Australia will only encourage lowest-cost present day low-emission alternatives. The tax should be complemented by German-style schemes to boost photovoltaics, which are presently at a low stage of development but have the potential to lower costs in the future.
Efficiency and sustainability
Green's research team currently holds the record for highly efficient solar cell technology, which has been commercialised through CSG Solar Pty Ltd, of which he is research director. Green says current silicon cells show 25% efficiency in the lab, although commercially available panels operate at just 14 to 15%. His team is working with several companies to improve this efficiency.
He says the thermodynamic limit of converting sunlight into electricity is 74%, and at this point, the best lab device reaches 36% using cells made from exotic materials. Green says the energy being used to make solar cells is also reducing. "Everything that is being done to reduce the cost of the cells also reduces the energy content", he says.
And he says the industry is moving away from the use of toxic chemicals that require expensive disposal, with pollution from solar cell production becoming the exception. "Of the hundreds of manufacturers in China there have been two of them in the last five years that have been found to be not disposing of the wastes of the processing of the silicon for the cells in an acceptable way".
Thursday, 1 December 2011
Coal seam gas may not help climate fight
www.smh.com.au
19 Nov 2011
The federal Minister for Energy, Martin Ferguson, is often criticised but he's right about this: the coal seam gas industry has grown too fast. We have not done our homework before issuing approvals for this $50 billion-plus export industry-on the possible groundwater and land-use impact, on what to do with the millions of tonnes of salt left over, or the impact on Gladstone harbour and the Great Barrier Reef. Crucially, we have rushed to develop coal seam gas reserves as a cleaner alternative to coal, assuming it will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and tackle climate change. But will coal seam gas reduce emissions? By how much? We don't actually know.
Recent research into fugitive emissions, including peer-reviewed articles by Cornell University's Robert Howarth and the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research's Tom Wigley, both published in Climate Change Letters, have found unconventional plays like coal seam gas or shale gas may deliver no greenhouse benefit at all, or even make things worse.
If that turns out to be right, gas may be an obstacle rather than a bridge to a decarbonised future. With the International Energy Agency warning this month that the energy infrastructure we build over the next five years will determine whether the world is able to limit global warming to 2°, it's hard to think of a more critical climate policy question-or one with more money riding on it. Early this year the oil and gas industry lobby group, the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA), commissioned research by engineering consultancy WorleyParsons on the life cycle emissions of coal seam gas versus coal when exported and burned in China.
APPEA did something strange. It only released the executive summary. Why? Because, according to some of its members, there were scenarios which showed how coal seam gas might emit more greenhouse gasses than coal. At worst, if burned in the least efficient ''peaking'' open-cycle turbines, coal seam gas was up to 44% dirtier than the newest, most efficient coal-fired plant. Some inside Worley-and the better coal seam gas companies, too-were unhappy with the association's handling of the report. There was pressure to get it out. The executive director of the think tank Beyond Zero Emissions, Matthew Wright, got wind of the industry disquiet and had an idea: commission a separate study by Worley-in fact, widen its scope-and get the results into the public domain that way. A contract was drawn up and a price agreed: $50,000. Wright believes the work was done and the report drafted. Somewhere, things went off the rails.
Cold feet at Worley, perhaps? All week, starting in Monday's Age and on ABC Radio National's Breakfast program and running from there, the accusations have flown thick and fast. Worley says it and Beyond Zero mutually agreed to drop the contract, no fee being payable. Instead, the same research would be published in a peer-reviewed journal, Energies. Wright flatly denies he ever agreed to that-he still wants the report he commissioned-and claims Worley is suppressing the report to stay on side with the coal seam gas industry which gives it contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Worley rejects that outright and says everything Beyond Zero commissioned-''the full box and dice'', a spokesman told me-will be in the Energies paper. How, asks Wright, when his report had a broader scope than the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association's 80-odd page document, and what peer-reviewed journal would publish all that? As it happened, a fortnight ago APPEA did finally release its own full, original report by Worley. Some media took APPEA's line, saying it proved gas was cleaner; others focused on the previously unreleased information, including less flattering gas-versus-coal scenarios. It's now online.
On Tuesday the Merrill Lynch oil and gas analyst David Heard weighed in with a six-page note to clients titled: ''Green gas debate: who is hiding the fugitives?'' It pulls the APPEA report apart. For a start, the report assumes coal seam gas/liquefied natural gas projects apply best practice in greenhouse gas and environmental management, especially to prevention of venting and leaks in upstream operations. Extreme scenarios for coal seam gas venting and leakage were excluded. Extreme was defined to mean ''other than best practice''. But Heard records his personal observation of a Santos drilling operation in the Cooper Basin (not a coal seam gas well, as it happens) where after fracking and in the flow-back phase ''the well vents a mixture of fracking fluid and gas direct to atmosphere in an unconstrained manner for days''. Heard's colleagues in the US have found likewise.
Then Heard noted how our National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting System (NGERS) allowed the coal seam gas companies to rely on a 2004 US industry-derived document, the American Petroleum Institute's Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil and Gas Industry, which explicitly stated it was ''neither a standard nor a recommended practice for the development of emissions inventories''. The compendium contains generic assumptions, Heard noted, which may be outdated given the rapid development of unconventional gas extraction, and inapplicable in an Australian context.
APPEA's report admits, on page eight, ''the large-scale CSG/LNG industry in Queensland is new and emissions are only projections subject to high uncertainties in some areas''. Under our emissions trading scheme, carbon price liability is determined according to the emissions reported under NGERS system, including fugitive emissions. Ferguson says leave it to the market, guided by the carbon price. But relying on the Compendium could lead companies to understate emissions and ignore any carbon price signal. If, for example, the coal seam gas companies just use a rule of thumb-a broad average at the end of the year by some junior accountant asked to 'multiply the number of wells we've drilled by a number in a 2004 US document'-there is no price signal.
We need better science on the emissions from coal seam gas and, ultimately, Heard's note backs Wright, expressing concern at the alleged suppression of Worley's report for Beyond Zero, and concluding such a thorough independent expert assessment of full life-cycle emissions would be worthwhile. This week Ferguson ruled out the government commissioning any such report. A spokesman for the Climate Change Minister, Greg Combet, conceded the NGERS probably relied on an estimation approach to emissions from coal seam gas extraction, but said the system allowed for annual updating of estimation methods as new science came in. Lastly, Heard's note criticises APPEA's assumption that gas substitutes for inefficient coal in baseload generation in China. This may not be correct, he writes, ''gas is not really competing with coal at all''.
Heard's concern, on his clients' behalf, is not so much that the coal seam gas companies could face higher-than-expected carbon price liabilities if we had a truer picture of emissions. Rather, it's that amid an increasingly nasty debate on the roll-out of coal seam gas in Queensland and NSW, and given these projects are on thin ice politically as they push east coast gas prices higher by linking us to international markets, the last thing the industry needs is to lose the one thing it had going for it: an apparent benefit in tackling climate change. The gas projects are counting on expansion, to build second and subsequent liquefaction ''trains'', and approvals may prove harder to come by. If the greenhouse benefit claims turn out to be false, it's bad news for the coal seam gas companies.
paddy.manning@fairfaxmedia.com.au
Twitter: @gpaddymanning
19 Nov 2011
The federal Minister for Energy, Martin Ferguson, is often criticised but he's right about this: the coal seam gas industry has grown too fast. We have not done our homework before issuing approvals for this $50 billion-plus export industry-on the possible groundwater and land-use impact, on what to do with the millions of tonnes of salt left over, or the impact on Gladstone harbour and the Great Barrier Reef. Crucially, we have rushed to develop coal seam gas reserves as a cleaner alternative to coal, assuming it will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and tackle climate change. But will coal seam gas reduce emissions? By how much? We don't actually know.
Recent research into fugitive emissions, including peer-reviewed articles by Cornell University's Robert Howarth and the US National Centre for Atmospheric Research's Tom Wigley, both published in Climate Change Letters, have found unconventional plays like coal seam gas or shale gas may deliver no greenhouse benefit at all, or even make things worse.
If that turns out to be right, gas may be an obstacle rather than a bridge to a decarbonised future. With the International Energy Agency warning this month that the energy infrastructure we build over the next five years will determine whether the world is able to limit global warming to 2°, it's hard to think of a more critical climate policy question-or one with more money riding on it. Early this year the oil and gas industry lobby group, the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association (APPEA), commissioned research by engineering consultancy WorleyParsons on the life cycle emissions of coal seam gas versus coal when exported and burned in China.
APPEA did something strange. It only released the executive summary. Why? Because, according to some of its members, there were scenarios which showed how coal seam gas might emit more greenhouse gasses than coal. At worst, if burned in the least efficient ''peaking'' open-cycle turbines, coal seam gas was up to 44% dirtier than the newest, most efficient coal-fired plant. Some inside Worley-and the better coal seam gas companies, too-were unhappy with the association's handling of the report. There was pressure to get it out. The executive director of the think tank Beyond Zero Emissions, Matthew Wright, got wind of the industry disquiet and had an idea: commission a separate study by Worley-in fact, widen its scope-and get the results into the public domain that way. A contract was drawn up and a price agreed: $50,000. Wright believes the work was done and the report drafted. Somewhere, things went off the rails.
Cold feet at Worley, perhaps? All week, starting in Monday's Age and on ABC Radio National's Breakfast program and running from there, the accusations have flown thick and fast. Worley says it and Beyond Zero mutually agreed to drop the contract, no fee being payable. Instead, the same research would be published in a peer-reviewed journal, Energies. Wright flatly denies he ever agreed to that-he still wants the report he commissioned-and claims Worley is suppressing the report to stay on side with the coal seam gas industry which gives it contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Worley rejects that outright and says everything Beyond Zero commissioned-''the full box and dice'', a spokesman told me-will be in the Energies paper. How, asks Wright, when his report had a broader scope than the Australian Petroleum Production & Exploration Association's 80-odd page document, and what peer-reviewed journal would publish all that? As it happened, a fortnight ago APPEA did finally release its own full, original report by Worley. Some media took APPEA's line, saying it proved gas was cleaner; others focused on the previously unreleased information, including less flattering gas-versus-coal scenarios. It's now online.
On Tuesday the Merrill Lynch oil and gas analyst David Heard weighed in with a six-page note to clients titled: ''Green gas debate: who is hiding the fugitives?'' It pulls the APPEA report apart. For a start, the report assumes coal seam gas/liquefied natural gas projects apply best practice in greenhouse gas and environmental management, especially to prevention of venting and leaks in upstream operations. Extreme scenarios for coal seam gas venting and leakage were excluded. Extreme was defined to mean ''other than best practice''. But Heard records his personal observation of a Santos drilling operation in the Cooper Basin (not a coal seam gas well, as it happens) where after fracking and in the flow-back phase ''the well vents a mixture of fracking fluid and gas direct to atmosphere in an unconstrained manner for days''. Heard's colleagues in the US have found likewise.
Then Heard noted how our National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting System (NGERS) allowed the coal seam gas companies to rely on a 2004 US industry-derived document, the American Petroleum Institute's Compendium of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodologies for the Oil and Gas Industry, which explicitly stated it was ''neither a standard nor a recommended practice for the development of emissions inventories''. The compendium contains generic assumptions, Heard noted, which may be outdated given the rapid development of unconventional gas extraction, and inapplicable in an Australian context.
APPEA's report admits, on page eight, ''the large-scale CSG/LNG industry in Queensland is new and emissions are only projections subject to high uncertainties in some areas''. Under our emissions trading scheme, carbon price liability is determined according to the emissions reported under NGERS system, including fugitive emissions. Ferguson says leave it to the market, guided by the carbon price. But relying on the Compendium could lead companies to understate emissions and ignore any carbon price signal. If, for example, the coal seam gas companies just use a rule of thumb-a broad average at the end of the year by some junior accountant asked to 'multiply the number of wells we've drilled by a number in a 2004 US document'-there is no price signal.
We need better science on the emissions from coal seam gas and, ultimately, Heard's note backs Wright, expressing concern at the alleged suppression of Worley's report for Beyond Zero, and concluding such a thorough independent expert assessment of full life-cycle emissions would be worthwhile. This week Ferguson ruled out the government commissioning any such report. A spokesman for the Climate Change Minister, Greg Combet, conceded the NGERS probably relied on an estimation approach to emissions from coal seam gas extraction, but said the system allowed for annual updating of estimation methods as new science came in. Lastly, Heard's note criticises APPEA's assumption that gas substitutes for inefficient coal in baseload generation in China. This may not be correct, he writes, ''gas is not really competing with coal at all''.
Heard's concern, on his clients' behalf, is not so much that the coal seam gas companies could face higher-than-expected carbon price liabilities if we had a truer picture of emissions. Rather, it's that amid an increasingly nasty debate on the roll-out of coal seam gas in Queensland and NSW, and given these projects are on thin ice politically as they push east coast gas prices higher by linking us to international markets, the last thing the industry needs is to lose the one thing it had going for it: an apparent benefit in tackling climate change. The gas projects are counting on expansion, to build second and subsequent liquefaction ''trains'', and approvals may prove harder to come by. If the greenhouse benefit claims turn out to be false, it's bad news for the coal seam gas companies.
paddy.manning@fairfaxmedia.com.au
Twitter: @gpaddymanning
Wednesday, 28 September 2011
Hydro powers up to record $100m profit
Hobart Mercury
23 Sep 2011, Page: 15
Hydro Tasmania has announced a record $100 million annual profit The result was up more than $20 million on last year's profit and was underpinned by greater rainfall, improved corporate efficiency, booming interstate sales and increased exports via Basslink. Hydro chairman David Crean said. The business will return $51.7 million to government, up from $13 million last year. "We've had a very good year for Hydro Tasmania", Dr Crean said. "This result has been on the back of a far more efficient organisation post-Basslink and of course two years of good rainfall. "This improvement is almost entirely due to our growth on the mainland through our retail arm momentum and through our wholesale contract position on the mainland. "The interstate growth strategy is delivering dividends".
The government-owned business also expected to pay increasing dividends to government over coming years, Dr Crean said. "This financial year we will return $119 million to the State Government and we expect that to reach $180 million by 2016", he said. The Basslink electricity interconnector had shown its value last year by exporting more than 1300 GWs into the national electricity market, often at premium prices during times of high demand.
"Basslink has really demonstrated its dual purpose. It has demonstrated on the one hand its ability to provide security of supply, keeping the lights on in times of drought", Dr Crean said. "On the other hand it has demonstrated our ability to export into the national market at high prices and import at low prices". The Federal Government's carbon price was a plus for Australia's largest renewable energy generator, but Hydro Tasmania was expecting a modest windfall from the new laws. "Certainly not $200 million, $100 million probably not and it could be below $50 million", Dr Crean said. Liberal energy spokesman Matthew Groom said the profit should be directed towards reducing the cost of electricity for Tasmanian customers.
23 Sep 2011, Page: 15
Hydro Tasmania has announced a record $100 million annual profit The result was up more than $20 million on last year's profit and was underpinned by greater rainfall, improved corporate efficiency, booming interstate sales and increased exports via Basslink. Hydro chairman David Crean said. The business will return $51.7 million to government, up from $13 million last year. "We've had a very good year for Hydro Tasmania", Dr Crean said. "This result has been on the back of a far more efficient organisation post-Basslink and of course two years of good rainfall. "This improvement is almost entirely due to our growth on the mainland through our retail arm momentum and through our wholesale contract position on the mainland. "The interstate growth strategy is delivering dividends".
The government-owned business also expected to pay increasing dividends to government over coming years, Dr Crean said. "This financial year we will return $119 million to the State Government and we expect that to reach $180 million by 2016", he said. The Basslink electricity interconnector had shown its value last year by exporting more than 1300 GWs into the national electricity market, often at premium prices during times of high demand.
"Basslink has really demonstrated its dual purpose. It has demonstrated on the one hand its ability to provide security of supply, keeping the lights on in times of drought", Dr Crean said. "On the other hand it has demonstrated our ability to export into the national market at high prices and import at low prices". The Federal Government's carbon price was a plus for Australia's largest renewable energy generator, but Hydro Tasmania was expecting a modest windfall from the new laws. "Certainly not $200 million, $100 million probably not and it could be below $50 million", Dr Crean said. Liberal energy spokesman Matthew Groom said the profit should be directed towards reducing the cost of electricity for Tasmanian customers.
Monday, 29 August 2011
Seam gas: CEO still uncertain
Age
19 August 2011, Page: 8
ONE of Australia's top energy chiefs has conceded that there is still significant uncertainty about emissions from coal seam gas, as controversy continues to plague the fledgling industry. The concession by Origin Energy CEO Grant King came amid disputed claims over carbon emissions released by CSG, and as a gas conference in Sydney was marred by protests.
Greens MPs have challenged the conventional wisdom that gas gives off about half as much greenhouse gas as coal when burned for fuel. They claim the release of "fugitive" emissions under coal seam gas extraction renders gas almost as polluting as coal once the "full life cycle" is considered.
Mr King said there was no doubt that conventional gas was less polluting than coal, but conceded that evidence about the pollution rates from CSG was "less readily available". "This is in part because interest in the issue has only arisen recently and in part because actual results will vary according to specific plant and equipment being used by different owners and operators along the supply chain", he said.
Woodside Petroleum chief executive Peter Coleman said he was yet to see a business case that could lure the Perth company into alternative forms of gas such as CSG. But after years working in the US for Exxon-Mobil, Mr Coleman said he had noticed that communities were less hostile to alternative forms of gas when landowners shared in the rewards. WA Premier Colin Barnett has suggested that close to half Australia's power needs should be generated by gas, but Mr Coleman said that was unlikely to happen until the domestic market was willing to pay as much for gas as export markets were.
19 August 2011, Page: 8
ONE of Australia's top energy chiefs has conceded that there is still significant uncertainty about emissions from coal seam gas, as controversy continues to plague the fledgling industry. The concession by Origin Energy CEO Grant King came amid disputed claims over carbon emissions released by CSG, and as a gas conference in Sydney was marred by protests.
Greens MPs have challenged the conventional wisdom that gas gives off about half as much greenhouse gas as coal when burned for fuel. They claim the release of "fugitive" emissions under coal seam gas extraction renders gas almost as polluting as coal once the "full life cycle" is considered.
Mr King said there was no doubt that conventional gas was less polluting than coal, but conceded that evidence about the pollution rates from CSG was "less readily available". "This is in part because interest in the issue has only arisen recently and in part because actual results will vary according to specific plant and equipment being used by different owners and operators along the supply chain", he said.
Woodside Petroleum chief executive Peter Coleman said he was yet to see a business case that could lure the Perth company into alternative forms of gas such as CSG. But after years working in the US for Exxon-Mobil, Mr Coleman said he had noticed that communities were less hostile to alternative forms of gas when landowners shared in the rewards. WA Premier Colin Barnett has suggested that close to half Australia's power needs should be generated by gas, but Mr Coleman said that was unlikely to happen until the domestic market was willing to pay as much for gas as export markets were.
Thursday, 18 August 2011
Court invokes coals to Newcastle rule
Age
11 August 2011, Page: 5
A VISTA of gas rigs dotted along the coast from Sydney to Newcastle was never going to be a winner with New South Wales coastal councils. And in a rebuff to energy explorers keen to push new techniques and test mining legislation it has not been a winner with government. Federal Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson and his former Labor state counterpart, Steve Whan, have refused to grant offshore exploration licences to underground coal gasification proponent Energie Future.
The ministerial rejection came to light in documents before the Federal Court, where Energie Future is seeking judicial review of the decision by the ministers, who were acting as the joint authority under the Offshore Minerals Act. In 2008, Energie Future applied for four lease exploration areas, covering 6000 km². The boundary comes as close as five kilometres to the coast.
NSW refused the application last October and in November Mr Ferguson agreed. One of the grounds cited by the joint authority was concern about the effect on flora and fauna on the ocean floor and the "fragile beach environments". As recently as June, Gosford, Wyong, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle and Port Stephens councils wrote to the state government, opposing offshore mining in the permit area. They asked what contingency plans the companies had to deal with an oil spill or gas leak, and also queried the effect on the annual whale migrations.
Underground coal gasification (UCG) is a new technology in which coal is burnt and converted to a synthesised (or non-natural) gas underground. The method is used to access coal resources that are either uneconomic or inaccessible to work by conventional means. It is a different process to coal seam gas (CSG) extraction, which is experiencing strong community and some political opposition. It involves drawing water from the coal seam gass to release primarily naturally occurring methane gas.
The joint authority concluded: "The work program was inadequate, the application area is in conflict with [the existing] petroleum exploration permit 11, and the understanding that synthetic manufacture of syngas using underground coal gasification methods is not encompassed by the Offshore Minerals Act nor the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006".
Its key point of refusal was that the "in situ production of a synthetic gas was not classified as a naturally occurring substance", and the extraction method proposed was not covered under the legislation. "It would be irresponsible to grant an exploration licence that would be unable to proceed to a mining licence under the legislative framework", it said. Energie Future has argued the joint authority made an error in law, and also denied the company natural justice. It says it is not a precondition to the granting of a mining licence that the licence holder recover a "mineral". It also says the authority did not consider its proposed alternative method of mining coal through boreholes.
11 August 2011, Page: 5
A VISTA of gas rigs dotted along the coast from Sydney to Newcastle was never going to be a winner with New South Wales coastal councils. And in a rebuff to energy explorers keen to push new techniques and test mining legislation it has not been a winner with government. Federal Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson and his former Labor state counterpart, Steve Whan, have refused to grant offshore exploration licences to underground coal gasification proponent Energie Future.
The ministerial rejection came to light in documents before the Federal Court, where Energie Future is seeking judicial review of the decision by the ministers, who were acting as the joint authority under the Offshore Minerals Act. In 2008, Energie Future applied for four lease exploration areas, covering 6000 km². The boundary comes as close as five kilometres to the coast.
NSW refused the application last October and in November Mr Ferguson agreed. One of the grounds cited by the joint authority was concern about the effect on flora and fauna on the ocean floor and the "fragile beach environments". As recently as June, Gosford, Wyong, Lake Macquarie, Newcastle and Port Stephens councils wrote to the state government, opposing offshore mining in the permit area. They asked what contingency plans the companies had to deal with an oil spill or gas leak, and also queried the effect on the annual whale migrations.
Underground coal gasification (UCG) is a new technology in which coal is burnt and converted to a synthesised (or non-natural) gas underground. The method is used to access coal resources that are either uneconomic or inaccessible to work by conventional means. It is a different process to coal seam gas (CSG) extraction, which is experiencing strong community and some political opposition. It involves drawing water from the coal seam gass to release primarily naturally occurring methane gas.
The joint authority concluded: "The work program was inadequate, the application area is in conflict with [the existing] petroleum exploration permit 11, and the understanding that synthetic manufacture of syngas using underground coal gasification methods is not encompassed by the Offshore Minerals Act nor the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006".
Its key point of refusal was that the "in situ production of a synthetic gas was not classified as a naturally occurring substance", and the extraction method proposed was not covered under the legislation. "It would be irresponsible to grant an exploration licence that would be unable to proceed to a mining licence under the legislative framework", it said. Energie Future has argued the joint authority made an error in law, and also denied the company natural justice. It says it is not a precondition to the granting of a mining licence that the licence holder recover a "mineral". It also says the authority did not consider its proposed alternative method of mining coal through boreholes.
Sunday, 24 July 2011
Farmers 'at mercy' of CSG companies
news.smh.com.au
July 20, 2011
Farmers are at the mercy of giant mining companies and feel helpless, a Senate inquiry into the coal seam gas industry has been told. Farmers have been forced to become gas and legal experts as they fight to protect their land and water, the Queensland Farmers Federation told the inquiry on Wednesday. QFF chief executive officer Dan Galligan said there'd been no research on the impact the burgeoning CSG industry would have on water bores.
Yet the industry was racing ahead. "The horse has bolted", Mr Galligan told the hearing in Brisbane. "It has bolted out of the paddock and we are all wondering who is going to shut the gate. "Many farmers, like us, feel disempowered". He said there were major concerns about the effects of the industry on groundwater, and no one was sure what would happen with the tonnes of salty water drawn from coal seam gass.
Senator Bill Heffernan said he believed CSG companies had a "cowboy attitude". "We have seen truckloads of stuff dumped on the road with no regard for anyone", he said. "A lot of farmers think money is going to stop the problems but I haven't come upon anyone from CSIRO who understands the water implications. "And no amount of money is going to compensate (for any damage).
The inquiry held hearings in Roma and Dalby earlier this week. Mr Galligan said there must be meaningful consultation between farmers and mining companies. "At the moment there is very little say (given to) the landholder", he told the hearing. He said farmers accepted the CSG industry contributed to local economies. "The issue is not to never have gas, but how can we have it without destroying our farming land", he said. "No environmental impact statement looks at food production". He said the state government was more interested in mining royalties.
July 20, 2011
Farmers are at the mercy of giant mining companies and feel helpless, a Senate inquiry into the coal seam gas industry has been told. Farmers have been forced to become gas and legal experts as they fight to protect their land and water, the Queensland Farmers Federation told the inquiry on Wednesday. QFF chief executive officer Dan Galligan said there'd been no research on the impact the burgeoning CSG industry would have on water bores.
Yet the industry was racing ahead. "The horse has bolted", Mr Galligan told the hearing in Brisbane. "It has bolted out of the paddock and we are all wondering who is going to shut the gate. "Many farmers, like us, feel disempowered". He said there were major concerns about the effects of the industry on groundwater, and no one was sure what would happen with the tonnes of salty water drawn from coal seam gass.
Senator Bill Heffernan said he believed CSG companies had a "cowboy attitude". "We have seen truckloads of stuff dumped on the road with no regard for anyone", he said. "A lot of farmers think money is going to stop the problems but I haven't come upon anyone from CSIRO who understands the water implications. "And no amount of money is going to compensate (for any damage).
The inquiry held hearings in Roma and Dalby earlier this week. Mr Galligan said there must be meaningful consultation between farmers and mining companies. "At the moment there is very little say (given to) the landholder", he told the hearing. He said farmers accepted the CSG industry contributed to local economies. "The issue is not to never have gas, but how can we have it without destroying our farming land", he said. "No environmental impact statement looks at food production". He said the state government was more interested in mining royalties.
Monday, 11 July 2011
The politics of clean energy
Summaries - Australian Financial ReviewI
6 July 2011, Page: 53
Although Australia is respected for its scientific research, the country's ability to successfully commercialise inventions is seen as weak. Solar voltaic technology that was developed at the University of New South Wales has been commercialised three times by BP, CSG Solar and Suntech Power, all overseas. While there are companies such as Silex Systems, which is building a solar power station locally and has developed laser technologies being used overseas in partnership with GE, that have Federal Government support, there is a consensus that Australia's support for commercialisation is poor.
GeoDynamics says the 'massive structural changes' needed for the successful implementation of technologies such as its geothermal power require changed policy frameworks, while the Australian Coal Association's Ralph Hillman says a carbon price will not be sufficient to drive the commercialisation of new technologies. Companies such as the Australian Securities Exchange listed AlgaeTec avoid government assistance due to intrusive bureaucracy, while Canberra's Dyesol has had to go to overseas companies Tata Power Steel and Pilkington Glass to help produce its technologies.
The Government's climate adviser, Ross Garnaut, says Australia's alternative energy R&D and commercialisation policies are poor, with the Australian National Audit Office finding that the 13 low emissions funding schemes often have spent little of their funding. Garnaut has proposed the creation of a Low Emissions Innovation Council to co ordinate efforts. Resource Minister Martin Ferguson, in recent comments to a Committee for the Economic Development of Australia, said the government was supporting renewable energy technologies.
Elsewhere, the CSIRO is spending funds on its 'energy transformed' project that includes building management systems that help to cut power usage, while GE has a partnership with electric vehicle group Better Place, as well as a partnership with EV Engineering that is helping develop an all electric GM GM Holden Commodore, which GE's Custom Fleet business could help.
6 July 2011, Page: 53
Although Australia is respected for its scientific research, the country's ability to successfully commercialise inventions is seen as weak. Solar voltaic technology that was developed at the University of New South Wales has been commercialised three times by BP, CSG Solar and Suntech Power, all overseas. While there are companies such as Silex Systems, which is building a solar power station locally and has developed laser technologies being used overseas in partnership with GE, that have Federal Government support, there is a consensus that Australia's support for commercialisation is poor.
GeoDynamics says the 'massive structural changes' needed for the successful implementation of technologies such as its geothermal power require changed policy frameworks, while the Australian Coal Association's Ralph Hillman says a carbon price will not be sufficient to drive the commercialisation of new technologies. Companies such as the Australian Securities Exchange listed AlgaeTec avoid government assistance due to intrusive bureaucracy, while Canberra's Dyesol has had to go to overseas companies Tata Power Steel and Pilkington Glass to help produce its technologies.
The Government's climate adviser, Ross Garnaut, says Australia's alternative energy R&D and commercialisation policies are poor, with the Australian National Audit Office finding that the 13 low emissions funding schemes often have spent little of their funding. Garnaut has proposed the creation of a Low Emissions Innovation Council to co ordinate efforts. Resource Minister Martin Ferguson, in recent comments to a Committee for the Economic Development of Australia, said the government was supporting renewable energy technologies.
Elsewhere, the CSIRO is spending funds on its 'energy transformed' project that includes building management systems that help to cut power usage, while GE has a partnership with electric vehicle group Better Place, as well as a partnership with EV Engineering that is helping develop an all electric GM GM Holden Commodore, which GE's Custom Fleet business could help.
Monday, 7 March 2011
Fear-mongering on wind
Age
25 February 2011 Page: 16
MICHAEL Madden (Letters, 24/2), Spain and Portugal have not lost 2½ jobs for every new job in renewable energy. This is a theoretical figure from a discredited study from a US right wing thinktank. The Spanish themselves said the study used incorrect data and egregiously flawed assumptions. Spain and Portugal are unable to import more than about 10% of their electricity, from French nuclear plants or otherwise, due to limited capacity on the Pyrenees interconnectors. They meet energy demand overwhelmingly from their own resources, increasingly from renewables.
Wind and solar provided 19% of all Spain's electricity needs in 2010, and on occasion supply nearly two thirds of the instantaneous demand. Yet Spain's electricity prices are consistently below the EU average. I visited Portugal and Spain last year and wasn't struck by "visual pollution": instead there is widespread acceptance of wind power, perhaps due to the absence of an anti renewables lobby suggesting to people they ought to fear wind turbines.
Tony Morton, Coburg
25 February 2011 Page: 16
MICHAEL Madden (Letters, 24/2), Spain and Portugal have not lost 2½ jobs for every new job in renewable energy. This is a theoretical figure from a discredited study from a US right wing thinktank. The Spanish themselves said the study used incorrect data and egregiously flawed assumptions. Spain and Portugal are unable to import more than about 10% of their electricity, from French nuclear plants or otherwise, due to limited capacity on the Pyrenees interconnectors. They meet energy demand overwhelmingly from their own resources, increasingly from renewables.
Wind and solar provided 19% of all Spain's electricity needs in 2010, and on occasion supply nearly two thirds of the instantaneous demand. Yet Spain's electricity prices are consistently below the EU average. I visited Portugal and Spain last year and wasn't struck by "visual pollution": instead there is widespread acceptance of wind power, perhaps due to the absence of an anti renewables lobby suggesting to people they ought to fear wind turbines.
Tony Morton, Coburg
Friday, 21 January 2011
Santos green-lights $16b CSG project
Courier Mail
14 January 2011, Page: 28
ABOUT $31 billion of investment is to be unleashed in Queensland after Santos and its partners yesterday announced the go-ahead for a $US16 billion ($A16.2 billion) coal seam gas development, the second of the controversial projects to be approved.
Adelaide-based oil and gas explorer Santos, which owns 30% of the Gladstone LNG (GLNG) project, and offshore partners Petronas, Total and Kogas, said the decision to proceed meant orders would immediately be placed for pipes, compressors and LNG plant components. Up to 1500 jobs are expected to be created between now and June.
Last October, UK-based BG Group became the first to give final investment clearance to a major project to convert coal seam gas from the Surat and Bowen Basins into LNG for Asian and domestic energy markets at processing plants at Gladstone. Its Queensland Curtis LNG project, to be operated by BG Group unit QGC, involves $US15 billion spent on two LNG processing lines or trains and wells, field facilities and pipelines.
BG Group expects first LNG exports from 2014. Santos's schedule sees first shipments from its two-train project in 2015. Santos chief executive David Knox said he didn't expect any impacts on the project from Queensland's flood disaster. "We're confident we will achieve first gas in 2015. We've got sufficient flexibility in our schedule. We will gradually ramp up this year in terms of staff numbers. Our peak employment isn't until 2013", Mr Knox said.
State and federal environmental approvals granted last year had cleared the way for the GLNG and QCLNG partners to take their final investment decisions. The environmental approvals came despite calls from agricultural industries, water management groups and environmentalists for a comprehensive scientific analysis of water impacts from CSG mining to be conducted.
The National Water Commission last month issued a major report on CSG mining risks in areas such as the Surat Basin, which is part of the Murray-Darling Basin and lies above the Great Artesian Basin. National Water Commissioner Chloe Munro said the CSG industry "risks significant, long-term and adverse impacts on surface and groundwater systems". She stressed that the potential impacts of CSG projects over a significant time period "are not well understood".
CSG mining involves bringing saline underground water to the surface in order to release trapped gas, and there are fears that water networks will be depleted or contaminated. The NWC raised major concerns with water practices proposed by CSG miners and issued recommendations for state and federal governments, including that CSG miners obtain licences for any water extracted.
The NWC said the CSG industry could extract 7500 gigalitres of water from groundwater systems over 25 years, or about,300GL a year. Currently, Australia's total extraction from the Great Artesian Basin is about 540GL a year Mr Knox said that he was not aware of the NWC recommendations.
New England MP Tony Windsor has said he will use his balance of power position in Federal Parliament this year to force CSG miners to conduct assessments of long-term, regional impacts of their controversial practices, either before exploration licences are granted or if necessary before mining proceeds. Santos shares closed up 2.2%, or 29¢, at $13.45.
14 January 2011, Page: 28
Adelaide-based oil and gas explorer Santos, which owns 30% of the Gladstone LNG (GLNG) project, and offshore partners Petronas, Total and Kogas, said the decision to proceed meant orders would immediately be placed for pipes, compressors and LNG plant components. Up to 1500 jobs are expected to be created between now and June.
Last October, UK-based BG Group became the first to give final investment clearance to a major project to convert coal seam gas from the Surat and Bowen Basins into LNG for Asian and domestic energy markets at processing plants at Gladstone. Its Queensland Curtis LNG project, to be operated by BG Group unit QGC, involves $US15 billion spent on two LNG processing lines or trains and wells, field facilities and pipelines.
BG Group expects first LNG exports from 2014. Santos's schedule sees first shipments from its two-train project in 2015. Santos chief executive David Knox said he didn't expect any impacts on the project from Queensland's flood disaster. "We're confident we will achieve first gas in 2015. We've got sufficient flexibility in our schedule. We will gradually ramp up this year in terms of staff numbers. Our peak employment isn't until 2013", Mr Knox said.
State and federal environmental approvals granted last year had cleared the way for the GLNG and QCLNG partners to take their final investment decisions. The environmental approvals came despite calls from agricultural industries, water management groups and environmentalists for a comprehensive scientific analysis of water impacts from CSG mining to be conducted.
The National Water Commission last month issued a major report on CSG mining risks in areas such as the Surat Basin, which is part of the Murray-Darling Basin and lies above the Great Artesian Basin. National Water Commissioner Chloe Munro said the CSG industry "risks significant, long-term and adverse impacts on surface and groundwater systems". She stressed that the potential impacts of CSG projects over a significant time period "are not well understood".
CSG mining involves bringing saline underground water to the surface in order to release trapped gas, and there are fears that water networks will be depleted or contaminated. The NWC raised major concerns with water practices proposed by CSG miners and issued recommendations for state and federal governments, including that CSG miners obtain licences for any water extracted.
The NWC said the CSG industry could extract 7500 gigalitres of water from groundwater systems over 25 years, or about,300GL a year. Currently, Australia's total extraction from the Great Artesian Basin is about 540GL a year Mr Knox said that he was not aware of the NWC recommendations.
New England MP Tony Windsor has said he will use his balance of power position in Federal Parliament this year to force CSG miners to conduct assessments of long-term, regional impacts of their controversial practices, either before exploration licences are granted or if necessary before mining proceeds. Santos shares closed up 2.2%, or 29¢, at $13.45.
Monday, 27 December 2010
Investment jolt for electricity network
Adelaide Advertiser
Wednesday 8/12/2010 Page: 63
UP to $6 billion could be spent on South Australia's electricity transmission network by 2020 as demand for power increases, ElectraNet chief executive Ian Stirling said. Mr Stirling expected at least a $2 billion capital injection over the next 10 years with the potential investment increasing to $6 billion "if all the planets aligned".
"There could potentially be $6 billion of transmission development in South Australia in the next 10 years. That's probably the high side", Mr Stirling said at the SA Infrastructure Summit 2010 in Adelaide yesterday. "This would be driven by the mining sector and the need to be able to deliver new generation".
He said the need for a new electricity interconnector between SA and New South Wales, more demand for green power and a "decent carbon price" would also drive investment higher. Meanwhile, SA had enough electricity generation capacity for the next few years with the new Cherokee gas fired electricity power station to be built near Mannum to help meet the peak demand. The power station is expected to reach maximum capacity of 1000MWs by 2021, capable of meeting up to 25% of the state's peak demand.
Wind farm power generation capacity coming on stream also would meet demands for at least five years. But it would be at least 15 years before renewable energy sources, such as geothermal, became key to the state's electricity baseload with more gas-fired power stations to till the gap until then.
ElectraNet owns 6000 circuit kilometres of wires and 79 substations in the state and has invested $800 million in transmission in SA since 2000. It generated revenue of $3 billion last financial year and represents about 10% of the price of power paid by South Australians.
Meanwhile, Mr Stirling said expected electricity price rises may be partly offset over the next few years as "ramp gas" or gas from coal seam gas producers in New South Wales and Queensland was dumped on to the market. "This may affect the profitability of generators in Queensland", he said.
Wednesday 8/12/2010 Page: 63
UP to $6 billion could be spent on South Australia's electricity transmission network by 2020 as demand for power increases, ElectraNet chief executive Ian Stirling said. Mr Stirling expected at least a $2 billion capital injection over the next 10 years with the potential investment increasing to $6 billion "if all the planets aligned".
"There could potentially be $6 billion of transmission development in South Australia in the next 10 years. That's probably the high side", Mr Stirling said at the SA Infrastructure Summit 2010 in Adelaide yesterday. "This would be driven by the mining sector and the need to be able to deliver new generation".
He said the need for a new electricity interconnector between SA and New South Wales, more demand for green power and a "decent carbon price" would also drive investment higher. Meanwhile, SA had enough electricity generation capacity for the next few years with the new Cherokee gas fired electricity power station to be built near Mannum to help meet the peak demand. The power station is expected to reach maximum capacity of 1000MWs by 2021, capable of meeting up to 25% of the state's peak demand.
Wind farm power generation capacity coming on stream also would meet demands for at least five years. But it would be at least 15 years before renewable energy sources, such as geothermal, became key to the state's electricity baseload with more gas-fired power stations to till the gap until then.
ElectraNet owns 6000 circuit kilometres of wires and 79 substations in the state and has invested $800 million in transmission in SA since 2000. It generated revenue of $3 billion last financial year and represents about 10% of the price of power paid by South Australians.
Meanwhile, Mr Stirling said expected electricity price rises may be partly offset over the next few years as "ramp gas" or gas from coal seam gas producers in New South Wales and Queensland was dumped on to the market. "This may affect the profitability of generators in Queensland", he said.
Thursday, 12 August 2010
A breath of fresh Eyre?
Business Spectator
Wednesday 4/8/2010 Page: 1
The federal government has made much of its promised $1 billion injection into green grids to bring the country's mostly remote renewable energy sources to the doorstep. And they have received just as much publicity from being criticised for doing too little, too slowly. It may be, though, that some particularly rich areas of renewable resources do not need so much support in direct subsidies. All they need is a change in the rules, and for those changes to be made promptly.
A study into a possible green grid on the Eyre Peninsula by Macquarie Group, legal firm Baker and McKenzie and engineering firm WorleyParsons showed that a grid linking 2000MW of wind power and delivering it to the national grid at Port Augusta could be self-funding. The study estimates a new 500kV grid suitable for up to 2000MW of wind power would cost around $613 million. But such is the strength of the wind resource in the area that the investment could be funded by the developers themselves, at an ongoing annual cost of around $50 million.
Four wind developers - Origin Energy, Pacific Hydro, Acciona Energy and Transfield Services - have expressed an interest in the proposal. This approach would require that a raft of regulatory changes currently under discussion are passes, as expected, early next year. Principal among them is a mechanism known as Scale Efficient Network Extensions (SENE) which allows costs to be recovered from generators rather than having the sole burden on financing the project placed on a developer.
That changes the nature of the game somewhat and the Eyre Peninsula proposal is being touted as a potential model for future investments to modernise the nation's energy transmission infrastructure - a grid to unlock combined solar and geothermal provinces around Mount Isa or in the Pilbara come to mind.
The green grid proposal does require an upgrade of the shared network and the grid interconnector into Victoria, which would allow South Australia to export its excess wind resources. This would be decided by an economic test, but the backers are confident that the potential of unlocking nearly $6 billion in investment and creating 5,000 full-time jobs would be a powerful argument.
A more ambitious plan could seek to unlock a further 2000MW of Eyre Peninsula wind power, but this would require a new interconnector, most likely a HVDC line, into New South Wales. The advantage of this line, however, is that it could pick up some of the geothermal resources being developed in the Cooper Basin and elsewhere in the state.
There are other attractions for a green grid in a location such as the Eyre Peninsula. Apart from being an excellent wind resource, the area is sparsely populated, meaning less risk of a confrontation with local townships and farmers. Here, Australia has an advantage over the UK, for instance, which has virtually run out of land-based options for wind power expansion and is now proposing a massive government-funded investment to unlock offshore wind resource.
It would also help ensure Australia meets its 20% renewable energy target by 2020. This is an important consideration given that delays in legislation and the slump in the price of renewable energy certificates, along with difficulties in obtaining power purchase agreements, is putting the RET target at risk.
Grid games
What could be more fun for an energy boffin than to draw up - according to his or her own preference - their ideal energy grid in 2050? The UK Department of Energy and Climate Change has offered just this opportunity as part of their 2050 Pathways program, which analyses different paths to achieve the government's target of an 80% in greenhouse gas emissions in 2050 from 1990 levels.
The analysis in the 2050 Pathways work presents a framework where people can consider the scale of change required and some of the choices and trade-offs that have to be made over the next 40 years. The analysis canvasses various levels of ambition - ranging from not much, to extreme - and half a dozen different pathways, the first canvassing an equivalent level of effort across renewables, nuclear, and fossil fuel power installations, along with carbon capture and storage, as well as bioenergy.
The other pathways canvass scenarios where CCS was not an option, if no nuclear plants were built, if only limited new renewable capacity was built, if there were limited supplies of bioenergy, and if there was little change in behaviour from consumers and businesses. The reference case assumes no efforts to decarbonise, and therefore no new technologies. It is not a good result, as it would leave the country extremely vulnerable to supply shocks. Its energy security would be minimal, the DECC says.
Interestingly, the DECC notes that although the primary rationale for moving to a low-carbon pathway is not to reduce energy costs, the analysis indicates that low-carbon energy generation can actually be less expensive than conventional energy generation under high fossil fuel price scenarios, and this did not take into account any carbon price.
Boffins can use the 2050 Pathways calculator tool, which allows users to explore different combinations and rates of change in various economic sectors to reach the target, all the while making sure that energy supply meets demand. It is, admittedly, a UK model, so you won't find much here on geothermal and you will see more emphasis on nuclear. But it is fascinating to explore, and wouldn't it be interesting if Australia produced a similar document? Where is that energy white paper?
Wednesday 4/8/2010 Page: 1
The federal government has made much of its promised $1 billion injection into green grids to bring the country's mostly remote renewable energy sources to the doorstep. And they have received just as much publicity from being criticised for doing too little, too slowly. It may be, though, that some particularly rich areas of renewable resources do not need so much support in direct subsidies. All they need is a change in the rules, and for those changes to be made promptly.
A study into a possible green grid on the Eyre Peninsula by Macquarie Group, legal firm Baker and McKenzie and engineering firm WorleyParsons showed that a grid linking 2000MW of wind power and delivering it to the national grid at Port Augusta could be self-funding. The study estimates a new 500kV grid suitable for up to 2000MW of wind power would cost around $613 million. But such is the strength of the wind resource in the area that the investment could be funded by the developers themselves, at an ongoing annual cost of around $50 million.
Four wind developers - Origin Energy, Pacific Hydro, Acciona Energy and Transfield Services - have expressed an interest in the proposal. This approach would require that a raft of regulatory changes currently under discussion are passes, as expected, early next year. Principal among them is a mechanism known as Scale Efficient Network Extensions (SENE) which allows costs to be recovered from generators rather than having the sole burden on financing the project placed on a developer.
That changes the nature of the game somewhat and the Eyre Peninsula proposal is being touted as a potential model for future investments to modernise the nation's energy transmission infrastructure - a grid to unlock combined solar and geothermal provinces around Mount Isa or in the Pilbara come to mind.
The green grid proposal does require an upgrade of the shared network and the grid interconnector into Victoria, which would allow South Australia to export its excess wind resources. This would be decided by an economic test, but the backers are confident that the potential of unlocking nearly $6 billion in investment and creating 5,000 full-time jobs would be a powerful argument.
A more ambitious plan could seek to unlock a further 2000MW of Eyre Peninsula wind power, but this would require a new interconnector, most likely a HVDC line, into New South Wales. The advantage of this line, however, is that it could pick up some of the geothermal resources being developed in the Cooper Basin and elsewhere in the state.
There are other attractions for a green grid in a location such as the Eyre Peninsula. Apart from being an excellent wind resource, the area is sparsely populated, meaning less risk of a confrontation with local townships and farmers. Here, Australia has an advantage over the UK, for instance, which has virtually run out of land-based options for wind power expansion and is now proposing a massive government-funded investment to unlock offshore wind resource.
It would also help ensure Australia meets its 20% renewable energy target by 2020. This is an important consideration given that delays in legislation and the slump in the price of renewable energy certificates, along with difficulties in obtaining power purchase agreements, is putting the RET target at risk.
Grid games
What could be more fun for an energy boffin than to draw up - according to his or her own preference - their ideal energy grid in 2050? The UK Department of Energy and Climate Change has offered just this opportunity as part of their 2050 Pathways program, which analyses different paths to achieve the government's target of an 80% in greenhouse gas emissions in 2050 from 1990 levels.
The analysis in the 2050 Pathways work presents a framework where people can consider the scale of change required and some of the choices and trade-offs that have to be made over the next 40 years. The analysis canvasses various levels of ambition - ranging from not much, to extreme - and half a dozen different pathways, the first canvassing an equivalent level of effort across renewables, nuclear, and fossil fuel power installations, along with carbon capture and storage, as well as bioenergy.
The other pathways canvass scenarios where CCS was not an option, if no nuclear plants were built, if only limited new renewable capacity was built, if there were limited supplies of bioenergy, and if there was little change in behaviour from consumers and businesses. The reference case assumes no efforts to decarbonise, and therefore no new technologies. It is not a good result, as it would leave the country extremely vulnerable to supply shocks. Its energy security would be minimal, the DECC says.
Interestingly, the DECC notes that although the primary rationale for moving to a low-carbon pathway is not to reduce energy costs, the analysis indicates that low-carbon energy generation can actually be less expensive than conventional energy generation under high fossil fuel price scenarios, and this did not take into account any carbon price.
Boffins can use the 2050 Pathways calculator tool, which allows users to explore different combinations and rates of change in various economic sectors to reach the target, all the while making sure that energy supply meets demand. It is, admittedly, a UK model, so you won't find much here on geothermal and you will see more emphasis on nuclear. But it is fascinating to explore, and wouldn't it be interesting if Australia produced a similar document? Where is that energy white paper?
Thursday, 7 January 2010
Not cooking with Moomba gas
Adelaide Advertiser
Monday 28/12/2009 Page: 61
SOUTH Australia must look to Queensland for gas, amid predictions that reserves at Moomba will decline by 30% over the next two decades. A $2.5 billion upgrade to the SA/New South Wales electricity interconnector is also proposed to reduce blackouts, two reports from the Australian Energy Market Operator find. But most worrying to consumers will be the finding that the carbon pollution reduction scheme is expected to triple the price of electricity over the next 20 years.
The National Transmission Statement expects the wholesale price of electricity will move towards $100 MW/hour. "Our simulations indicate that substantial change is coming to the electricity supply industry, as higher carbon and market prices drive new investment," the report states. The report also identifies two "big concept" transmission projects for South Australia - a $2.5 billion upgrade to the Murraylink interconnector and a $3.6 billion line from Innamincka in the Far North of the state, to carry geothermal power.
Transmission company ElectraNet and AEMO will conduct a feasibility study to investigate upgrading the Murraylink and Heywood interconnectors. The Gas Statement of Opportunities also finds that Moomba's gas reserves will go down from 1400 to 1000 petajoules and Queensland coal seam deposits are the best option by which to meet SA's growing demands.
Monday 28/12/2009 Page: 61
SOUTH Australia must look to Queensland for gas, amid predictions that reserves at Moomba will decline by 30% over the next two decades. A $2.5 billion upgrade to the SA/New South Wales electricity interconnector is also proposed to reduce blackouts, two reports from the Australian Energy Market Operator find. But most worrying to consumers will be the finding that the carbon pollution reduction scheme is expected to triple the price of electricity over the next 20 years.
The National Transmission Statement expects the wholesale price of electricity will move towards $100 MW/hour. "Our simulations indicate that substantial change is coming to the electricity supply industry, as higher carbon and market prices drive new investment," the report states. The report also identifies two "big concept" transmission projects for South Australia - a $2.5 billion upgrade to the Murraylink interconnector and a $3.6 billion line from Innamincka in the Far North of the state, to carry geothermal power.
Transmission company ElectraNet and AEMO will conduct a feasibility study to investigate upgrading the Murraylink and Heywood interconnectors. The Gas Statement of Opportunities also finds that Moomba's gas reserves will go down from 1400 to 1000 petajoules and Queensland coal seam deposits are the best option by which to meet SA's growing demands.
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
Electricity market needs capital boost
Summaries - Australian Financial Review
Thursday 17/12/2009 Page: 11
According to new research due to be released by the federal Minister for Resources and Energy, Martin Ferguson, Australia's $11 billion national electricity market will require significant extensions due to the Rudd governments greenhouse policy. Mr Ferguson said the enforceable renewable energy target and proposed emissions trading scheme could increase wind energy by 450% in five years and gas power tenfold in 20 years.
Geothermal power will take 15 years to become profitable under the current technologies. The report find that the NEM will need address short falls in the grid and be able to connect renewable power to them, which are often set in distant locations unlike coal and hydro. The Australian Energy Market Operator believes that there will be greater congestion in the networks as the renewable energy comes online. Projects that will be looked at are the existing electricity interconnector between Queensland and NSW.
Industry sources believe that there will an expenditure of $1.2 billion a year in capital investments on transmission infrastructure. The report was produced by the AEMO under the reforms agreed by the Council of Australian Governments. NSW pricing regulator believes electricity charges should rise by 42% and 62% over the next three years commencing June 2010.
The Coalition and the Greens defeated the Governments emissions trading legislation in parliament. Mr Ferguson will also release a report into the viability of gas and how it will grow, exports and domestic use will grow by threefold in Queensland over the next 20 years, while in Victoria growth has been set to double in the next 15 years.
Thursday 17/12/2009 Page: 11
According to new research due to be released by the federal Minister for Resources and Energy, Martin Ferguson, Australia's $11 billion national electricity market will require significant extensions due to the Rudd governments greenhouse policy. Mr Ferguson said the enforceable renewable energy target and proposed emissions trading scheme could increase wind energy by 450% in five years and gas power tenfold in 20 years.
Geothermal power will take 15 years to become profitable under the current technologies. The report find that the NEM will need address short falls in the grid and be able to connect renewable power to them, which are often set in distant locations unlike coal and hydro. The Australian Energy Market Operator believes that there will be greater congestion in the networks as the renewable energy comes online. Projects that will be looked at are the existing electricity interconnector between Queensland and NSW.
Industry sources believe that there will an expenditure of $1.2 billion a year in capital investments on transmission infrastructure. The report was produced by the AEMO under the reforms agreed by the Council of Australian Governments. NSW pricing regulator believes electricity charges should rise by 42% and 62% over the next three years commencing June 2010.
The Coalition and the Greens defeated the Governments emissions trading legislation in parliament. Mr Ferguson will also release a report into the viability of gas and how it will grow, exports and domestic use will grow by threefold in Queensland over the next 20 years, while in Victoria growth has been set to double in the next 15 years.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Electricity lines: Power to the people
www.guardian.co.uk
28 October 2009
Electricity is invisible; unfortunately the structures that carry it across the country are not. When, in 1928, Sir Reginald Blomfield gave his architectural approval to the six-armed steel monsters that now stalk Britain, the electrification of the country was a national priority. Little thought was given to the route that power lines took, or their ability to drain wildness from the landscape. The result is that tens of thousands of pylons march in lines across the countryside, loathed, immobile and ugly. Worse, there are about to be many more.
In Scotland, it is rumoured, approval will soon be given to the controversial upgrading of the 220km Beauly to Denny line, tangling the Highlands in high-voltage wire – 600 pylons, each up to 200ft high, running through the Cairngorms national park. Meanwhile in England, the new Infrastructure Planning Commission announced last week that two long power lines, in Somerset and Suffolk, are among its priority projects. Anyone with an ounce of affection for rural Britain, able to see it as more than an empty and exploitable space between cities, should hate the prospect of these lines going ahead. But opposition is being tempered by an even greater environmental concern: the pylons are said to be an essential part of Britain's move to low-carbon electricity generation.
The Scottish line is being erected to link future wind and wave power stations with electricity consumers in northern England; the Suffolk and Sussex routes run to the sites of two new nuclear plants, also announced last week. This produces a dilemma: oppose the pylons, and you may play a part in accelerating climate change. That is why some environmentalists – such as the Scottish Green party – back the Beauly to Denny line as the price that has to be paid for clean power.
They should be bolder. Some new lines will be unavoidable. But not all of them. Power companies like pylons because they are cheap, or at least cheaper than any alternative, but many cables should run underground. This is very expensive and for a time destructive – but perhaps less expensive than Britain's National Grid suggests. Here, regulations say massive 400kV cables must run in special tunnels; Denmark and Japan now bury them directly into the earth, much more cheaply. Some lines might also be run through the sea (like the interconnectors with France and Northern Ireland): the Conservatives propose a new offshore grid, although they accept that some onshore lines will be needed too. Eventually, microgeneration might reduce the need for long-distance transmission. Britain's old grid was built quickly and unthinkingly; its new one should be greener, offshore and underground.
28 October 2009
Electricity is invisible; unfortunately the structures that carry it across the country are not. When, in 1928, Sir Reginald Blomfield gave his architectural approval to the six-armed steel monsters that now stalk Britain, the electrification of the country was a national priority. Little thought was given to the route that power lines took, or their ability to drain wildness from the landscape. The result is that tens of thousands of pylons march in lines across the countryside, loathed, immobile and ugly. Worse, there are about to be many more.
In Scotland, it is rumoured, approval will soon be given to the controversial upgrading of the 220km Beauly to Denny line, tangling the Highlands in high-voltage wire – 600 pylons, each up to 200ft high, running through the Cairngorms national park. Meanwhile in England, the new Infrastructure Planning Commission announced last week that two long power lines, in Somerset and Suffolk, are among its priority projects. Anyone with an ounce of affection for rural Britain, able to see it as more than an empty and exploitable space between cities, should hate the prospect of these lines going ahead. But opposition is being tempered by an even greater environmental concern: the pylons are said to be an essential part of Britain's move to low-carbon electricity generation.
The Scottish line is being erected to link future wind and wave power stations with electricity consumers in northern England; the Suffolk and Sussex routes run to the sites of two new nuclear plants, also announced last week. This produces a dilemma: oppose the pylons, and you may play a part in accelerating climate change. That is why some environmentalists – such as the Scottish Green party – back the Beauly to Denny line as the price that has to be paid for clean power.
They should be bolder. Some new lines will be unavoidable. But not all of them. Power companies like pylons because they are cheap, or at least cheaper than any alternative, but many cables should run underground. This is very expensive and for a time destructive – but perhaps less expensive than Britain's National Grid suggests. Here, regulations say massive 400kV cables must run in special tunnels; Denmark and Japan now bury them directly into the earth, much more cheaply. Some lines might also be run through the sea (like the interconnectors with France and Northern Ireland): the Conservatives propose a new offshore grid, although they accept that some onshore lines will be needed too. Eventually, microgeneration might reduce the need for long-distance transmission. Britain's old grid was built quickly and unthinkingly; its new one should be greener, offshore and underground.
Tuesday, 27 October 2009
Sparking up our electricity
Independent Weekly
Friday 23/10/2009 Page: 17
One way or another it appears Australia will have an emissions trading scheme (ETS) soon. The aim of such a scheme is to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions entering the atmosphere by charging organisations that are emitting CO2 for the right to do so. In turn that cost will be passed to consumers resulting in lower electricity usage. But this won't happen evenly for electricity, which is generated by a range of methods that emit different amounts of CO2, which means electricity charges vary under an ETS scheme.
SA remains heavily dependent on brown coal, which emits the most CO2. This is either from Leigh Creek coal burnt in the Northern and Playford power stations near Port Augusta or imported from Victorian generators by the interconnector power links. For this reason we need to re-engineer our electrical power generating system under an ETS.
Electricity companies, urged by the State and Federal governments, have started moving in this direction. The likeliest replacement option is wind energy. To bring our wind facilities up to the standard and size where they could cover the 780mW of power generated by coal would cost about $4 billion. So what else can be done? Being more efficient consumers is good but won't save 780mW. Leaving aside the politically controversial option of nuclear energy we have one major technology available. And we already have a working example right here in Adelaide at Pelican Point.
Combined cycle gas turbines offer a way to cut the cost of CO2 replacement. CCGT are really two power stations in one. The first half is just like one of the engines on the wing of a 747. It burns gas and the output turns a generator - this is the gas turbine part and it extracts about 40% of the available energy. The combined part comes from using the extremely hot exhaust gases from the gas turbine to heat water, create steam and use it to turn a second turbine where about 15% more energy is extracted.
Using this technology to replace coal electricity from the Leigh Creek stations would cost a bit less than $1 billion. Because the infrastructure is small when compared to wind farms they can be developed faster and located more conveniently to the main users. This would mean that instead of producing a kilogram of CO2 per kW/h we only produce 400g. But we still need to use a carbon-emitting fossil fuel, so we still need to buy a supply of gas and permits for the CCGT. The decision between wind turbines and CCGT will come down to the interest payments on the difference in the capital costs versus the running costs.
In householder terms, it's the interest payments on the extra $3 billion on the wind energy company mortgages versus the CCGT gas bill. We still don't really know the cost of the CO2 permits or the structure of the ETS so as a community we are working in the dark. Which way will we end up re-engineering our electricity system? It's still hard to predict. However the lower capital cost and concentrated simplicity of CCGT power plants when compared with the diffuse nature of wind turbines probably means most of the electricity supplied under the ETS will be from natural gas-fuelled CCGT for the next three decades.
Doug Gillott is President of the SA Division of Engineers Australia.
Friday 23/10/2009 Page: 17
One way or another it appears Australia will have an emissions trading scheme (ETS) soon. The aim of such a scheme is to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions entering the atmosphere by charging organisations that are emitting CO2 for the right to do so. In turn that cost will be passed to consumers resulting in lower electricity usage. But this won't happen evenly for electricity, which is generated by a range of methods that emit different amounts of CO2, which means electricity charges vary under an ETS scheme.
SA remains heavily dependent on brown coal, which emits the most CO2. This is either from Leigh Creek coal burnt in the Northern and Playford power stations near Port Augusta or imported from Victorian generators by the interconnector power links. For this reason we need to re-engineer our electrical power generating system under an ETS.
Electricity companies, urged by the State and Federal governments, have started moving in this direction. The likeliest replacement option is wind energy. To bring our wind facilities up to the standard and size where they could cover the 780mW of power generated by coal would cost about $4 billion. So what else can be done? Being more efficient consumers is good but won't save 780mW. Leaving aside the politically controversial option of nuclear energy we have one major technology available. And we already have a working example right here in Adelaide at Pelican Point.
Combined cycle gas turbines offer a way to cut the cost of CO2 replacement. CCGT are really two power stations in one. The first half is just like one of the engines on the wing of a 747. It burns gas and the output turns a generator - this is the gas turbine part and it extracts about 40% of the available energy. The combined part comes from using the extremely hot exhaust gases from the gas turbine to heat water, create steam and use it to turn a second turbine where about 15% more energy is extracted.
Using this technology to replace coal electricity from the Leigh Creek stations would cost a bit less than $1 billion. Because the infrastructure is small when compared to wind farms they can be developed faster and located more conveniently to the main users. This would mean that instead of producing a kilogram of CO2 per kW/h we only produce 400g. But we still need to use a carbon-emitting fossil fuel, so we still need to buy a supply of gas and permits for the CCGT. The decision between wind turbines and CCGT will come down to the interest payments on the difference in the capital costs versus the running costs.
In householder terms, it's the interest payments on the extra $3 billion on the wind energy company mortgages versus the CCGT gas bill. We still don't really know the cost of the CO2 permits or the structure of the ETS so as a community we are working in the dark. Which way will we end up re-engineering our electricity system? It's still hard to predict. However the lower capital cost and concentrated simplicity of CCGT power plants when compared with the diffuse nature of wind turbines probably means most of the electricity supplied under the ETS will be from natural gas-fuelled CCGT for the next three decades.
Doug Gillott is President of the SA Division of Engineers Australia.
Wednesday, 10 June 2009
Coal seam water a big challenge
Courier Mail
Tuesday 9/6/2009 Page: 56
QUEENSLAND'S coal seam gas industry, seen as a key energy and economic source for the state, is being asked how it will deal with the Sydney Harbour-sized amount of potentially hazardous water it could produce each five years. Agricultural businesses, fearing damage to waterways and crop land, have been seeking an end to coal seam gas companies' main practice of leaving untreated in large pools the highly salty, poor quality water displaced during CSG extraction.
The Queensland Government has begun to respond to those concerns with a ruling last month that coal seam water was an environmental hazard for which safe disposal was needed "There are significant ecological risks associated with disposal of (CSG water) and, without treatment, the Government believes the beneficial uses of CSG water are limited," a Queensland infrastructure and planning department discussion paper said in May.
In a 2006-07 report, members of the Independent Audit Group for Salinity appointed to review progress on implementing the Murray-Darling Basin Salinity Management Strategy asked Queensland to assess the salinity and chemical risks from coal seam water to land, groundwater systems, vegetation and surface water in the Condamine-Balonne catchments.
Nevertheless, 12.5 billion litres of coal seam water was produced in Queensland in 2007 and most went into evaporation ponds that range in size from one to 100 hectares. The Government's May discussion paper said there were "generally widespread concerns about evaporation ponds and the long-term legacy associated with salt stored in them".
It said disposal of an annual volume of 100 billion litres of coal seam water based on some estimates of the potential size of a liquefied natural gas industry using CSG in evaporation ponds would require a 100sq km area within 15-30 years. Sydney Harbour contains about 500 billion litres of water.
The Queensland and federal governments are encouraging the development of coal seam gas for export and for domestic gas fired electricity sources that would emit less greenhouse gases than coalfired facilites. But in March the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering called for the Federal Government to find out and discuss with the public the best ways to power homes and businesses when impacts on human health, crops, biodiversity and the climate are quantified and included in the costs of the different sources of electricity generation.
The Queensland Government has now suggested the CSG industry co-operates to develop and fund a CSG water aggregation and disposal system to deal with coal seam water in the Bowen and Surat basins in central and southern Queensland. CSG Producer Queensland Gas Company spokesman Hedley Thomas said it was investigating the options for dealing with its coal seam water in an "acceptable, sustainable manner" and couldn't yet give cost estimates.
Santos spokesman Matthew Doman said it was spending an initial $50 million to use coal seam water on forestry projects, a method it says should take care of most of the water it produces. Rural lobby group AgForce said it was a given that coal seam water must be treated but there were also issues with treated water.
"You can create a new environmental set of conditions by putting unusually large amounts of water in an existing waterway so there are still some issues with that," AgForce president John Cotter said. "The Government's move to look at this in a strategic way is good. Evaporation ponds and the sludge they produce have been a key concern for agricultural producers and local communities. "We've seen mine overflows from disused mines, so there's all sorts of issues with this water sitting there and the last thing you want is that overflow getting into the Condamine Basin." he said.
Tuesday 9/6/2009 Page: 56
QUEENSLAND'S coal seam gas industry, seen as a key energy and economic source for the state, is being asked how it will deal with the Sydney Harbour-sized amount of potentially hazardous water it could produce each five years. Agricultural businesses, fearing damage to waterways and crop land, have been seeking an end to coal seam gas companies' main practice of leaving untreated in large pools the highly salty, poor quality water displaced during CSG extraction.The Queensland Government has begun to respond to those concerns with a ruling last month that coal seam water was an environmental hazard for which safe disposal was needed "There are significant ecological risks associated with disposal of (CSG water) and, without treatment, the Government believes the beneficial uses of CSG water are limited," a Queensland infrastructure and planning department discussion paper said in May.
In a 2006-07 report, members of the Independent Audit Group for Salinity appointed to review progress on implementing the Murray-Darling Basin Salinity Management Strategy asked Queensland to assess the salinity and chemical risks from coal seam water to land, groundwater systems, vegetation and surface water in the Condamine-Balonne catchments.
Nevertheless, 12.5 billion litres of coal seam water was produced in Queensland in 2007 and most went into evaporation ponds that range in size from one to 100 hectares. The Government's May discussion paper said there were "generally widespread concerns about evaporation ponds and the long-term legacy associated with salt stored in them".
It said disposal of an annual volume of 100 billion litres of coal seam water based on some estimates of the potential size of a liquefied natural gas industry using CSG in evaporation ponds would require a 100sq km area within 15-30 years. Sydney Harbour contains about 500 billion litres of water.
The Queensland and federal governments are encouraging the development of coal seam gas for export and for domestic gas fired electricity sources that would emit less greenhouse gases than coalfired facilites. But in March the Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering called for the Federal Government to find out and discuss with the public the best ways to power homes and businesses when impacts on human health, crops, biodiversity and the climate are quantified and included in the costs of the different sources of electricity generation.
The Queensland Government has now suggested the CSG industry co-operates to develop and fund a CSG water aggregation and disposal system to deal with coal seam water in the Bowen and Surat basins in central and southern Queensland. CSG Producer Queensland Gas Company spokesman Hedley Thomas said it was investigating the options for dealing with its coal seam water in an "acceptable, sustainable manner" and couldn't yet give cost estimates.
Santos spokesman Matthew Doman said it was spending an initial $50 million to use coal seam water on forestry projects, a method it says should take care of most of the water it produces. Rural lobby group AgForce said it was a given that coal seam water must be treated but there were also issues with treated water.
"You can create a new environmental set of conditions by putting unusually large amounts of water in an existing waterway so there are still some issues with that," AgForce president John Cotter said. "The Government's move to look at this in a strategic way is good. Evaporation ponds and the sludge they produce have been a key concern for agricultural producers and local communities. "We've seen mine overflows from disused mines, so there's all sorts of issues with this water sitting there and the last thing you want is that overflow getting into the Condamine Basin." he said.
Wednesday, 3 June 2009
Ranchers driving wind revolution
news.bbc.co.uk
1 June 2009
Texan cattle rancher Mike Baca seems an unlikely evangelist for the American green revolution. When he voices a visceral dislike of the "Washington liberals" there seems to be little hint of the environmentalist beneath the cowboy hat and saucer-sized belt-buckle. But Mike is proof that renewable energy now unites the partisan debate on climate change.
Many Republicans sceptical of climate science support a major expansion of renewables to ease their nation's dependence on foreign oil. In Mike's case, the tantalising prospect of pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars from wind turbines on his ranch proves an extra incentive. The sprawling ranch lies in the Texas panhandle on the high plains near Amarillo. Mike will not say how much land he owns but it stretches way beyond the horizon in all directions.
These high plains were considered low-grade land until engineers developed the fan-shaped wind pump to suck water from the shallow Ogallala aquifer and create cattle country. The aquifer is running dry but engineers have again harnessed the wind to bring income to the relatively small number of people who own these vast empty spaces. Mike is one of them. His nearest neighbours are miles away.
From the porch of his ranch-house - Tuscan with a Texan twist - at the floor of a verdant canyon he can sip bourbon and watch the giant blades turning a perpetual profit. "I like them. And I like the cheque that comes with them," he says. "I could do with a few more of them. We have to be concerned about what the world will be like for our grandchildren. If the turbines get noisy I can just switch on the fountain."
Texas utilities are planning a high voltage loop around the Panhandle to carry the power to the population centres of Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston. Donny Allred, the local county judge, is lobbying to lure the power lines to Amarillo. "This is the most perfect marriage of two industries - wind and cattle ranching," he says. "They were made for each other."
The power lines will carry about 50% wind energy and 50% from coal and gas to ensure security of supply. The great river of wind that flows from Texas to the Canadian border is one of the finest renewable energy reserves in the world and the American Wind Energy Association estimates that it could power America twice over. Ranch land is plentiful and the cows don't protest that their view is being spoiled - in fact they shelter in the shade of the turbine towers.
The profits are so easy that while energy investments have been plummeting worldwide, the high plains have been distracting the footloose energy giants from their planned offshore wind projects in the UK. The Obama administration is now working with American utilities nationally to create interconnectors to get the power where it is needed to the great cities on the coasts.
Some of the "wind states" have passed local laws stipulating the use of wind energy but some have been slow to capitalise. The Waxman-Markey Climate Bill going through Congress would mandate a minimum 20% renewables target for all states by 2020. The proposal has been watered down from 25% renewables in 2025. It is resisted by some politicians in south-eastern states where there is high dependence on Appalachian coal and less plentiful wind or solar energy.
The US energy secretary Steven Chu told BBC News that the 20% target was easily achievable. But environmentalists oppose it for that very reason. They say many states are on track to achieve more than 20% renewables by 2020. Jennifer Layke from the World Resources Institute in Washington told BBC News: "I think that we could do more with the emissions targets on the renewables front.
"I think this is a political compromise to manage issues associated with specific geographical concerns for the southern part of the United States and other areas." "As such, I think it creates the floor for action. That's a big improvement. It does not necessarily create the exponential scale-up of renewable technology that we need to combat climate change."
Either way, the renewable revolution has widespread support. At a rally of the Goldwing Road Riders in Amarillo we met bikers from both sides of the political divide. They were united over wind. Biker Wayne Jones said: "Oh lord! Climate change. I think that the wind is better than oil. It is a whole lot cleaner. Mother nature has given you the wind. It is free energy." Deborah Jones, another biker at the rally, told BBC News: "We need to be self-sufficient. As a nation, we need to rely on the United States."
1 June 2009
Texan cattle rancher Mike Baca seems an unlikely evangelist for the American green revolution. When he voices a visceral dislike of the "Washington liberals" there seems to be little hint of the environmentalist beneath the cowboy hat and saucer-sized belt-buckle. But Mike is proof that renewable energy now unites the partisan debate on climate change.Many Republicans sceptical of climate science support a major expansion of renewables to ease their nation's dependence on foreign oil. In Mike's case, the tantalising prospect of pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars from wind turbines on his ranch proves an extra incentive. The sprawling ranch lies in the Texas panhandle on the high plains near Amarillo. Mike will not say how much land he owns but it stretches way beyond the horizon in all directions.
These high plains were considered low-grade land until engineers developed the fan-shaped wind pump to suck water from the shallow Ogallala aquifer and create cattle country. The aquifer is running dry but engineers have again harnessed the wind to bring income to the relatively small number of people who own these vast empty spaces. Mike is one of them. His nearest neighbours are miles away.
From the porch of his ranch-house - Tuscan with a Texan twist - at the floor of a verdant canyon he can sip bourbon and watch the giant blades turning a perpetual profit. "I like them. And I like the cheque that comes with them," he says. "I could do with a few more of them. We have to be concerned about what the world will be like for our grandchildren. If the turbines get noisy I can just switch on the fountain."
Texas utilities are planning a high voltage loop around the Panhandle to carry the power to the population centres of Dallas-Fort Worth and Houston. Donny Allred, the local county judge, is lobbying to lure the power lines to Amarillo. "This is the most perfect marriage of two industries - wind and cattle ranching," he says. "They were made for each other."
The power lines will carry about 50% wind energy and 50% from coal and gas to ensure security of supply. The great river of wind that flows from Texas to the Canadian border is one of the finest renewable energy reserves in the world and the American Wind Energy Association estimates that it could power America twice over. Ranch land is plentiful and the cows don't protest that their view is being spoiled - in fact they shelter in the shade of the turbine towers.
The profits are so easy that while energy investments have been plummeting worldwide, the high plains have been distracting the footloose energy giants from their planned offshore wind projects in the UK. The Obama administration is now working with American utilities nationally to create interconnectors to get the power where it is needed to the great cities on the coasts.
Some of the "wind states" have passed local laws stipulating the use of wind energy but some have been slow to capitalise. The Waxman-Markey Climate Bill going through Congress would mandate a minimum 20% renewables target for all states by 2020. The proposal has been watered down from 25% renewables in 2025. It is resisted by some politicians in south-eastern states where there is high dependence on Appalachian coal and less plentiful wind or solar energy.
The US energy secretary Steven Chu told BBC News that the 20% target was easily achievable. But environmentalists oppose it for that very reason. They say many states are on track to achieve more than 20% renewables by 2020. Jennifer Layke from the World Resources Institute in Washington told BBC News: "I think that we could do more with the emissions targets on the renewables front.
"I think this is a political compromise to manage issues associated with specific geographical concerns for the southern part of the United States and other areas." "As such, I think it creates the floor for action. That's a big improvement. It does not necessarily create the exponential scale-up of renewable technology that we need to combat climate change."
Either way, the renewable revolution has widespread support. At a rally of the Goldwing Road Riders in Amarillo we met bikers from both sides of the political divide. They were united over wind. Biker Wayne Jones said: "Oh lord! Climate change. I think that the wind is better than oil. It is a whole lot cleaner. Mother nature has given you the wind. It is free energy." Deborah Jones, another biker at the rally, told BBC News: "We need to be self-sufficient. As a nation, we need to rely on the United States."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)