Sydney Morning Herald
8 August 2011, Page: 3
THE solar bonus scheme introduced last year was very successful in some suburbs, with more than 14% of homes installing rooftop solar panels, compared with a statewide average of about 3%. Figures provided to the Herald by three electricity distributors revealed the north coast had the highest number of solar schemes. In Dubbo, more than 2000 homes had also installed photovoltaic units.
Paul Myors, an energy efficiency specialist with Ausgrid, said the number of homes with solar panels had increased from 2000 18 months ago to 46,000, after the former NSW Labor government introduced the solar bonus rebate scheme that was scrapped in May by the new government.
Peak take-up rates are around the central coast and Lake Macquarie, where about 6% of homes in many suburbs have rooftop systems. Customers of Essential Energy, which supplies power to many country areas, installed more than 2200 systems in the post code covering Lismore and surrounding towns.
Data from the last census in 2006 said there were 18,500 dwellings in the Lismore postcode, which gives a rooftop solar system rate of more than 12%. In the Tweed Heads postcode, the rate is more than 14%, while Dubbo has a rate exceeding 13%, rates that Mr Myors described as "extraordinary".
Some of the high installation rates in certain towns are believed to be a result of intensive marketing campaigns conducted by solar panel companies. Mr Myors said the high percentage of detached homes with good solar access in some rural and regional areas was another factor behind the wide variations in take-up rates.
The chief executive of Strata Community Australia, Mark Lever, said more than 70% of residents in many Sydney local government areas live in apartments, as do more than 50% in North Sydney. He said while many of them wanted to install solar panels, the federal and state governments had not considered their needs while designing rebate schemes, leaving regulatory hurdles to be cleared.
"Body corporates are not eligible for federal Renewable Energy Certificates, and then they have to deal with the fact the Tax Office regards any income to the body corporate from solar schemes as mutual income that is taxable in the hands of individual owners", Mr Lever said. Ausgrid has started publishing details of solar panel installations and other data on its website to allow councils, consumers and other interested parties to compare trends in electricity consumption.
Mr Myors said the data showed that while electricity usage increased every year from the 1950s, it plateaued four years ago and had been declining by about 2% a year since then due to increased energy prices, improved energy efficiency in houses thanks in part to the home insulation scheme and more efficient appliances. However, peak demand was still increasing, especially on hot days. In 10 years, the percentage of houses with air-conditioning in NSW had increased from 30% to 70%, placing additional pressure on the system, he said.
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
Blackstone punts on wind farms
Canberra Times
8 August 2011, Page: 13
The US investment fund Blackstone Group plans to invest several billion euros in German wind farms, as the biggest economy in Europe will need the energy when it abandons nuclear power by 2022. Blackstone Group said that it had finalised 1.2 billion euros ($A1.63 billion) in financing to build what it says will be the biggest German offshore facility to date.
The fund said that it had also obtained permission for its wind company unit to develop a second site, putting its cost at $1.77 billion. The first farm, to consist of 80 turbines built by the German group Siemens, is to become operational in 2013 with a generating capacity of 288 MWs. Requiring around 100,000t of steel in its construction phase, the park should provide electricity for 400,000 homes and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by one million tonnes, a Siemens statement said. The turbines will be huge, with rotors that measure 120m in diameter, and are to stand in water more than 20m deep.
Siemens presents itself as the world's leading manufacturer of offshore wind turbines. Financing for the second project, designed for 63 turbines, should be finalised in 2013 and it is to be completed by 2016. Blackstone Group senior managing director David Foley welcomed "the progress and positive impact on the economy that can be achieved when private capital works in partnership with government, entrepreneurs and industry". Energy producers expect European wind power generation to triple by 2020, with tens of thousands of new wind turbines,the European Wind Energy Association said last week.
8 August 2011, Page: 13
The US investment fund Blackstone Group plans to invest several billion euros in German wind farms, as the biggest economy in Europe will need the energy when it abandons nuclear power by 2022. Blackstone Group said that it had finalised 1.2 billion euros ($A1.63 billion) in financing to build what it says will be the biggest German offshore facility to date.
The fund said that it had also obtained permission for its wind company unit to develop a second site, putting its cost at $1.77 billion. The first farm, to consist of 80 turbines built by the German group Siemens, is to become operational in 2013 with a generating capacity of 288 MWs. Requiring around 100,000t of steel in its construction phase, the park should provide electricity for 400,000 homes and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by one million tonnes, a Siemens statement said. The turbines will be huge, with rotors that measure 120m in diameter, and are to stand in water more than 20m deep.
Siemens presents itself as the world's leading manufacturer of offshore wind turbines. Financing for the second project, designed for 63 turbines, should be finalised in 2013 and it is to be completed by 2016. Blackstone Group senior managing director David Foley welcomed "the progress and positive impact on the economy that can be achieved when private capital works in partnership with government, entrepreneurs and industry". Energy producers expect European wind power generation to triple by 2020, with tens of thousands of new wind turbines,the European Wind Energy Association said last week.
Monday, 15 August 2011
Cracks appearing in Japan's nuclear power lobby
West Australian
5 August 2011, Page: 40
Japanese executives aren't known for bucking the establishment. Hiroshi Mikitani is a rare exception at a time when rebellion is most needed. The president of Rakuten, Japan's biggest online retailer, turned 46 on March 11. That was the day when a record earthquake and tsunami set off the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl and forever changed the way Japanese view the reactors in their midst. Almost five months later, the Fukushima plant is still leaking radioactivity
A growing majority of the nation's 127 million people want a future devoid of radiation, contaminated air and food, and who can blame them? Forget it, says corporate Japan, the economy will collapse if we give up on nuclear power. Count Mikitani among those who disagree. He recently quit Japan's main business lobby, Nippon Keidanren, to protest its support of the energy status quo. Good for him. Japan needs to harness power from safer sources, but the Government lacks the courage to seek them. So, the private sector is filling the void.
Most notable is billionaire Masayoshi Son, the 53-year-old chief executive officer of Softbank. He first cracked the monopolies that dominated Japan's telecommunications industry Now he's shaking up the utilities market with plans to invest about $US1 billion ($937 million) to build 10 solar farms. Granted, Prime Minister Naoto Kan would like to take on the alliance of politicians, bureaucrats and power companies promoting the nuclear industry. He has even proposed a halt to plans for 14 new reactors. Yet he is a short-timer; he pledged to step down once emergency-funding Bills are passed.
It is naive to think the forces arrayed against Kan aren't playing a role in his demise. More than any leader, Kan has taken on the nuclear-industrial complex, Japan's answer to the nexus of business and the military in the US. Expect the knives to be out for any leader with reformist sensibilities.
The industry's allies are rallying to maintain the supremacy of nuclear power. A huge scare campaign is under way to convince voters that living standards will shrivel if Japan de-emphasises atomic energy Before the Fukushima disaster, the industry provided about 30% of Japan's electricity The plan was for that to rise to 53% by 2030.
The earthquake changed all that. nuclear power makes perfect sense on paper. It emits little pollution or greenhouse gases and doesn't rely on dirty and expensive imported fossil fuel. Yet something that didn't change between Ukraine in 1986 and Japan in 2011 is the risk of design flaws, shoddy construction and poor training of reactor personnel the human factor.
Fukushima's back-up generators that might have averted the disaster were located in a basement and swamped by the waves. The monumental foolishness of that is summed up by Ken Brockman, a former director of nuclear installation safety at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna: "This in the country that invented the word tsunami".
The bigger irony is how the only nation ever to be attacked by nuclear weapons and the one with the most seismic activity so enthusiastically embraced a nuclear future. If the last five months taught us anything, it's the need to reconsider. No one is saying turn off all the reactors; the $US5 trillion economy has enough problems. Yet Japan needs an explosion of fresh ideas, innovation and investment to become less reliant on reactors. This should be a priority for any leader who succeeds Kan.
A recurring question in Tokyo has been: Who put Homer Simpson in charge? Japan's nuclear safety record these past 15 years seems no sounder than that of the fictional Springfield Nuclear Power Plant, where on The Simpsons, Homer is head of safety. Only, this is no laughing matter.
Alternative energy is an obvious chance for Japan to lead the world. Deflation and excessive debt cost Japan its economic vitality, especially as China thundered ahead to become the world's second-biggest economy. Credit Suisse Group, Switzerland's second-largest bank, recently stopped bothering to cover Japanese banks.
For all its economic sclerosis, Japan is a role model when it comes to energy efficiency. This can be seen in Tokyo's ability to avoid blackouts without Fukushima's reactors providing power to the city. Japan should act last to assert itself as the dominant power in clean energy, solar technology and storage batteries. It would create jobs, wealth and international prestige. Sadly, Tokyo's political class is preoccupied with internal, short-sighted squabbles. The good news is that the private sector is pushing ahead on its own.
The efforts by Softbank's Mr Son are even more important. His SUSI billion pledge is contingent upon getting access to transmission networks and regional utilities buying his electricity, As of July 27, a total of 17 big Japanese cities jumped on the alternative-to-nuclear bandwagon, the Asahi newspaper reported. It's a good start toward getting Homer Simpson's hands off the controls and a rare sign of hope in a nation that hasn't had a lot to cheer about.
5 August 2011, Page: 40
Japanese executives aren't known for bucking the establishment. Hiroshi Mikitani is a rare exception at a time when rebellion is most needed. The president of Rakuten, Japan's biggest online retailer, turned 46 on March 11. That was the day when a record earthquake and tsunami set off the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl and forever changed the way Japanese view the reactors in their midst. Almost five months later, the Fukushima plant is still leaking radioactivityA growing majority of the nation's 127 million people want a future devoid of radiation, contaminated air and food, and who can blame them? Forget it, says corporate Japan, the economy will collapse if we give up on nuclear power. Count Mikitani among those who disagree. He recently quit Japan's main business lobby, Nippon Keidanren, to protest its support of the energy status quo. Good for him. Japan needs to harness power from safer sources, but the Government lacks the courage to seek them. So, the private sector is filling the void.
Most notable is billionaire Masayoshi Son, the 53-year-old chief executive officer of Softbank. He first cracked the monopolies that dominated Japan's telecommunications industry Now he's shaking up the utilities market with plans to invest about $US1 billion ($937 million) to build 10 solar farms. Granted, Prime Minister Naoto Kan would like to take on the alliance of politicians, bureaucrats and power companies promoting the nuclear industry. He has even proposed a halt to plans for 14 new reactors. Yet he is a short-timer; he pledged to step down once emergency-funding Bills are passed.
It is naive to think the forces arrayed against Kan aren't playing a role in his demise. More than any leader, Kan has taken on the nuclear-industrial complex, Japan's answer to the nexus of business and the military in the US. Expect the knives to be out for any leader with reformist sensibilities.
The industry's allies are rallying to maintain the supremacy of nuclear power. A huge scare campaign is under way to convince voters that living standards will shrivel if Japan de-emphasises atomic energy Before the Fukushima disaster, the industry provided about 30% of Japan's electricity The plan was for that to rise to 53% by 2030.
The earthquake changed all that. nuclear power makes perfect sense on paper. It emits little pollution or greenhouse gases and doesn't rely on dirty and expensive imported fossil fuel. Yet something that didn't change between Ukraine in 1986 and Japan in 2011 is the risk of design flaws, shoddy construction and poor training of reactor personnel the human factor.
Fukushima's back-up generators that might have averted the disaster were located in a basement and swamped by the waves. The monumental foolishness of that is summed up by Ken Brockman, a former director of nuclear installation safety at the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna: "This in the country that invented the word tsunami".
The bigger irony is how the only nation ever to be attacked by nuclear weapons and the one with the most seismic activity so enthusiastically embraced a nuclear future. If the last five months taught us anything, it's the need to reconsider. No one is saying turn off all the reactors; the $US5 trillion economy has enough problems. Yet Japan needs an explosion of fresh ideas, innovation and investment to become less reliant on reactors. This should be a priority for any leader who succeeds Kan.
A recurring question in Tokyo has been: Who put Homer Simpson in charge? Japan's nuclear safety record these past 15 years seems no sounder than that of the fictional Springfield Nuclear Power Plant, where on The Simpsons, Homer is head of safety. Only, this is no laughing matter.
Alternative energy is an obvious chance for Japan to lead the world. Deflation and excessive debt cost Japan its economic vitality, especially as China thundered ahead to become the world's second-biggest economy. Credit Suisse Group, Switzerland's second-largest bank, recently stopped bothering to cover Japanese banks.
For all its economic sclerosis, Japan is a role model when it comes to energy efficiency. This can be seen in Tokyo's ability to avoid blackouts without Fukushima's reactors providing power to the city. Japan should act last to assert itself as the dominant power in clean energy, solar technology and storage batteries. It would create jobs, wealth and international prestige. Sadly, Tokyo's political class is preoccupied with internal, short-sighted squabbles. The good news is that the private sector is pushing ahead on its own.
The efforts by Softbank's Mr Son are even more important. His SUSI billion pledge is contingent upon getting access to transmission networks and regional utilities buying his electricity, As of July 27, a total of 17 big Japanese cities jumped on the alternative-to-nuclear bandwagon, the Asahi newspaper reported. It's a good start toward getting Homer Simpson's hands off the controls and a rare sign of hope in a nation that hasn't had a lot to cheer about.
Power generation in Latrobe 'to rise'
Age
5 August 2011, Page: 4
THE Latrobe Valley power generation industry will continue to grow for decades to come under a carbon price, according to economic modelling released by federal Treasury. Analyses released yesterday also suggest Australia will not meet its bipartisan target of 20% of electricity coming from renewable sources by 2020 without a carbon price or significant changes to existing renewable energy legislation.
In a challenge to claims that the Latrobe Valley would be devastated by forcing coal power plants to pay for their emissions, modelling by ROAM Consulting found the amount of power generated in the area would double under even a high carbon price by 2050.
Brown coal power generation is expected to continue to be the main source of power from the valley until at least 2030. It will gradually be replaced by baseload gas-fired power, which has about a third of the emissions of brown coal. The ROAM report says "that the Latrobe Valley remains a generation hub for all scenarios although under a carbon price there is incentive for increased diversification into gas, renewable and [carbon capture and storage] technologies".
The finding by ROAM is backed by a second consultancy, Sinclair Knight Merz, which found there was likely to be massive expansion of gas and renewable energy generation across Gippsland. The Sinclair report attributes the region's generation growth to its proximity to natural gas reserves, and strong wind, biomass and geothermal sources: "The exploitation of these resources under carbon pricing means that the overall level of electricity generation may not fall".
Other findings of five reports released by Treasury yesterday include:
Australia needs to cut emissions by about 160 million tonnes. The reports were commissioned as part of Treasury's modelling on the economic impacts of a carbon price. The Latrobe Valley findings are based on a starting carbon price of just under $20 a tonne and moderate global action to reduce emissions. The government carbon tax will start at $23 a tonne.
The modelling does not include the government's plans to pay to close two brown coal power plants, most likely Hazelwood in Victoria and Playford in South Australia.
5 August 2011, Page: 4
THE Latrobe Valley power generation industry will continue to grow for decades to come under a carbon price, according to economic modelling released by federal Treasury. Analyses released yesterday also suggest Australia will not meet its bipartisan target of 20% of electricity coming from renewable sources by 2020 without a carbon price or significant changes to existing renewable energy legislation.
In a challenge to claims that the Latrobe Valley would be devastated by forcing coal power plants to pay for their emissions, modelling by ROAM Consulting found the amount of power generated in the area would double under even a high carbon price by 2050.
Brown coal power generation is expected to continue to be the main source of power from the valley until at least 2030. It will gradually be replaced by baseload gas-fired power, which has about a third of the emissions of brown coal. The ROAM report says "that the Latrobe Valley remains a generation hub for all scenarios although under a carbon price there is incentive for increased diversification into gas, renewable and [carbon capture and storage] technologies".
The finding by ROAM is backed by a second consultancy, Sinclair Knight Merz, which found there was likely to be massive expansion of gas and renewable energy generation across Gippsland. The Sinclair report attributes the region's generation growth to its proximity to natural gas reserves, and strong wind, biomass and geothermal sources: "The exploitation of these resources under carbon pricing means that the overall level of electricity generation may not fall".
Other findings of five reports released by Treasury yesterday include:
- It would be cheaper under existing law for electricity companies to pay a penalty than meet the 20% renewable target by building new wind farms.
- $212 billion in new generation technology investment will be needed by the mid-century under a carbon price, almost double the investment needed without one.
- Retail electricity prices are estimated to increase between 7% and 48% depending on the size of emissions cuts in the period to 2020.
- The Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency found the government's carbon farming scheme which aims to reduce CO₂ from the land and livestock was likely to cut emissions by just 7 million tonnes of CO₂ a year by 2020.
Australia needs to cut emissions by about 160 million tonnes. The reports were commissioned as part of Treasury's modelling on the economic impacts of a carbon price. The Latrobe Valley findings are based on a starting carbon price of just under $20 a tonne and moderate global action to reduce emissions. The government carbon tax will start at $23 a tonne.
The modelling does not include the government's plans to pay to close two brown coal power plants, most likely Hazelwood in Victoria and Playford in South Australia.
WA solar must be given new life
www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au
1 August 2011
The WA solar industry has been dealt an unexpected blow by the Barnett Government with the sudden closure of their feed-in-tariff, announced today. "The Clean Energy Council is disappointed by this decision. West Australians have clearly demonstrated their enthusiasm for solar as a way to minimise the impact of future electricity price rises and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Chief Executive Matthew Warren said.
"We are disappointed that this announcement has been made without any consultation with the solar industry and with no consideration of the future support for this popular technology." Mr Warren said changes to the Commonwealth's solar incentives, as well as the State's decision to reduce their feed-in-tariff - which both took effect on July 1 – had contributed to a spike in applications.
"The temporary rush by consumers to get access to the best incentives unfortunately appears to have been used as an excuse to shut down an industry which was on track to stabilise under the lower incentives, as was the experience in other states," he said.
Mr Warren said without an alternative scheme in place, jobs would be lost. "The solar industry continues to seek policy certainty so that it is not at the mercy of knee-jerk reactions," Mr Warren said.
"West Australians have invested in the solar industry – both as consumers and in terms of new training, skills and jobs. The WA Government should not be turning back on this emerging industry." "We are calling on the WA Government to consider redesigning the scheme to ensure long-term sustainability of the industry and would welcome the opportunity to work with them on such a process."
1 August 2011
The WA solar industry has been dealt an unexpected blow by the Barnett Government with the sudden closure of their feed-in-tariff, announced today. "The Clean Energy Council is disappointed by this decision. West Australians have clearly demonstrated their enthusiasm for solar as a way to minimise the impact of future electricity price rises and reduce greenhouse gas emissions," Chief Executive Matthew Warren said.
"We are disappointed that this announcement has been made without any consultation with the solar industry and with no consideration of the future support for this popular technology." Mr Warren said changes to the Commonwealth's solar incentives, as well as the State's decision to reduce their feed-in-tariff - which both took effect on July 1 – had contributed to a spike in applications.
"The temporary rush by consumers to get access to the best incentives unfortunately appears to have been used as an excuse to shut down an industry which was on track to stabilise under the lower incentives, as was the experience in other states," he said.
Mr Warren said without an alternative scheme in place, jobs would be lost. "The solar industry continues to seek policy certainty so that it is not at the mercy of knee-jerk reactions," Mr Warren said.
"West Australians have invested in the solar industry – both as consumers and in terms of new training, skills and jobs. The WA Government should not be turning back on this emerging industry." "We are calling on the WA Government to consider redesigning the scheme to ensure long-term sustainability of the industry and would welcome the opportunity to work with them on such a process."
Thursday, 11 August 2011
Second wind for city's four new turbines
Hobart Mercury
4 August 2011, Page: 9
FOUR replacement wind turbines may be fastened on to the roof of Hobart's Marine Board building in less than two weeks. The Chinese-built turbines will look similar to those that failed spectacularly in August last year, about a month after they were installed. But project manager Keith Drew, acting for the building's owner Robert Rockefeller, said the turbines' braking systems had been extensively redesigned.
Mr Drew said the electro-mechanical brakes would allow the turbines to turn only when wind conditions were right. "By default the brakes will now be on unless all safety systems are operating properly", he said. Installation contractor I Want Energy yesterday began preparatory roof work. The pedestrian footpath on the eastern side of Mawson Place will be closed next week as the all-new vertical-axis turbines are assembled.
Weather permitting, the turbines will be lifted on to the building on August 14, but Mr Drew said it was not clear how long it would take before they were fully operational. "This new system of check and triple check, along with the redesigned control systems of the wind turbines, means the installation is now as safe as we can possibly make it, but we will only fully recommission the turbines once we are confident they operate as they are supposed to", he said.
Hobart City Council aldermen Ron Christie, Peter Sexton and Marti Zucco said they weren't convinced the new turbines would be safe. They said similar assurances had been given for the previous failed set of turbines. On August 11 last year nearby roads were closed when those turbines spun out of control in 50kmh winds, causing blades to collapse inwards after the brakes failed.
"There could have been a fatality", Aid Sexton said. "How it was that Workplace Standards Tasmania approved it in the first place, that's a very big and important question". He said turbines should not be allowed in cities until there was a certified Australian standard for their installation.
4 August 2011, Page: 9
FOUR replacement wind turbines may be fastened on to the roof of Hobart's Marine Board building in less than two weeks. The Chinese-built turbines will look similar to those that failed spectacularly in August last year, about a month after they were installed. But project manager Keith Drew, acting for the building's owner Robert Rockefeller, said the turbines' braking systems had been extensively redesigned.
Mr Drew said the electro-mechanical brakes would allow the turbines to turn only when wind conditions were right. "By default the brakes will now be on unless all safety systems are operating properly", he said. Installation contractor I Want Energy yesterday began preparatory roof work. The pedestrian footpath on the eastern side of Mawson Place will be closed next week as the all-new vertical-axis turbines are assembled.
Weather permitting, the turbines will be lifted on to the building on August 14, but Mr Drew said it was not clear how long it would take before they were fully operational. "This new system of check and triple check, along with the redesigned control systems of the wind turbines, means the installation is now as safe as we can possibly make it, but we will only fully recommission the turbines once we are confident they operate as they are supposed to", he said.
Hobart City Council aldermen Ron Christie, Peter Sexton and Marti Zucco said they weren't convinced the new turbines would be safe. They said similar assurances had been given for the previous failed set of turbines. On August 11 last year nearby roads were closed when those turbines spun out of control in 50kmh winds, causing blades to collapse inwards after the brakes failed.
"There could have been a fatality", Aid Sexton said. "How it was that Workplace Standards Tasmania approved it in the first place, that's a very big and important question". He said turbines should not be allowed in cities until there was a certified Australian standard for their installation.
Nothing fair or smart about solar bungling
West Australian
3 August 2011, Page: 20
The only thing saving the Barnett Government from a "pink batts" backlash over its comprehensive bungling of the rooftop solar panels scheme is scale. Luckily, the industry the Government poleaxed this week is smaller than that represented by the home insulation contractors the Rudd government ruined and there are fewer householders directly harmed.
But measuring your disasters against those of the past two Federal Labor governments can hardly be recommended as political best practice. The Liberal Party went to the last State election promising voters they would get a payment of 60¢ for every kW of electricity their rooftop panels fed into the power grid. It was the sort of political greenwash that has now become commonplace in Australian politics, playing on the good nature of those who want to "save the planet".
The essential difference was that this promise made commercial sense to those who liked the idea. It wasn't just green. It offered many people a real opportunity to cut their power bills. But the 60¢ tariff was such a fundamental misreading of the economics of our renewable energy future that it calls into question the Government's ability to deal with the new realities that the carbon tax will foist on the nation next year.
The renewable energy sector confirmed this week that the Australian Photo Voltaic Association told the WA Government in 2007 that a fair feed-in price was between 130-160. Why was that advice ignored? Who came up with the 60¢ tariff and why? When the promise finally made its way into the 2009 Budget, the Government set aside $13.5 million over four years.
By the time Energy Minister Peter Collier axed the program hastily on Monday morning, after this newspaper exposed its imminent demise "within weeks", its cost had blown out to $127 million. That is a massive bungle. And it was despite the fact that the Government had already dudded punters on its original tariff promise by reducing the starting price to 40¢ and then further cutting to 20¢ to try to contain its growth within the 150 MW quota.
Those people not frightened off by the Government's meddling who still want to go ahead with rooftop solar panels will now be offered a 7¢ return by wind.com/" target="_blank">Synergy Energy or Horizon. That tariff is laughably based on the cost of coal-fired power to the energy retailers and means that new entrants selling their solar electricity into the grid are effectively subsidising the State Government.
Why would anyone pay thousands of dollars for a solar system that feeds cheap electricity into the grid for negligible return while they are at work only to have to pay peak power rates for fossil fuelled energy when they come home in the evening and turn on their air-conditioning? Members of the WA solar panel industry met last week, fearing the 150 MW cap would be reached soon, not knowing whether the Government intended to extend the scheme on the basis of its unrivalled success.
"The Government has failed to consult with the industry on the ensuing changes, and this has made it very difficult for any business to plan effectively" Ray Wills, chief executive of the Sustainable Energy Association, said after Monday's brutal decision. "The renewable energy industry continues to be plagued by government decisions that lead to boom-bust cycles and fail to provide the conditions needed to grow the industry sustainably.
"While the SEA expects solar PV is likely to hit retail grid parity potentially by 2014-15, this interim period without some form of price support is likely to significantly erode the value and capability of the industry. The industry does not seek subsidies, just a fair price to be paid for consumers' exported electricity The provision of a fair price will create greater certainty and restore the confidence of solar installers to invest in growing their businesses, and consumers the confidence to buy". The raw politics of this decision are poisonous for the Barnett Government in the current economic climate.
Not only has it axed a program for being too popular a political non sequitur but it is seen to be stopping people from limiting their exposure to ever-increasing power price rises. Economic rationalists will rightly argue that home solar panels do not stack up in any direct comparison with commercial power generators.
The Productivity Commission found that a medium solar outfit produced power for around $400-$473/ MW compared with coal-fired electricity at $78-$91, combined-cycle gas turbines at $97 and wind turbines from $150-$214. But that doesn't take into account that private individuals are bearing the capital cost of the system and it frees up capacity in the existing low-cost State-owned generating system.
A well-priced feed-in tariff within a well-managed program with a realistic and expandable cap would have ensured a steady flow of privately sourced solar power at a lower cost than the Government could arrange through its own means to meet its renewable energy commitments. It is unlikely that the State will be able to extricate itself from ownership of its energy business any time soon. So its needs to get a lot smarter about how it handles the shift to renewables.
3 August 2011, Page: 20
The only thing saving the Barnett Government from a "pink batts" backlash over its comprehensive bungling of the rooftop solar panels scheme is scale. Luckily, the industry the Government poleaxed this week is smaller than that represented by the home insulation contractors the Rudd government ruined and there are fewer householders directly harmed.
But measuring your disasters against those of the past two Federal Labor governments can hardly be recommended as political best practice. The Liberal Party went to the last State election promising voters they would get a payment of 60¢ for every kW of electricity their rooftop panels fed into the power grid. It was the sort of political greenwash that has now become commonplace in Australian politics, playing on the good nature of those who want to "save the planet".
The essential difference was that this promise made commercial sense to those who liked the idea. It wasn't just green. It offered many people a real opportunity to cut their power bills. But the 60¢ tariff was such a fundamental misreading of the economics of our renewable energy future that it calls into question the Government's ability to deal with the new realities that the carbon tax will foist on the nation next year.
The renewable energy sector confirmed this week that the Australian Photo Voltaic Association told the WA Government in 2007 that a fair feed-in price was between 130-160. Why was that advice ignored? Who came up with the 60¢ tariff and why? When the promise finally made its way into the 2009 Budget, the Government set aside $13.5 million over four years.
By the time Energy Minister Peter Collier axed the program hastily on Monday morning, after this newspaper exposed its imminent demise "within weeks", its cost had blown out to $127 million. That is a massive bungle. And it was despite the fact that the Government had already dudded punters on its original tariff promise by reducing the starting price to 40¢ and then further cutting to 20¢ to try to contain its growth within the 150 MW quota.
Those people not frightened off by the Government's meddling who still want to go ahead with rooftop solar panels will now be offered a 7¢ return by wind.com/" target="_blank">Synergy Energy or Horizon. That tariff is laughably based on the cost of coal-fired power to the energy retailers and means that new entrants selling their solar electricity into the grid are effectively subsidising the State Government.
Why would anyone pay thousands of dollars for a solar system that feeds cheap electricity into the grid for negligible return while they are at work only to have to pay peak power rates for fossil fuelled energy when they come home in the evening and turn on their air-conditioning? Members of the WA solar panel industry met last week, fearing the 150 MW cap would be reached soon, not knowing whether the Government intended to extend the scheme on the basis of its unrivalled success.
"The Government has failed to consult with the industry on the ensuing changes, and this has made it very difficult for any business to plan effectively" Ray Wills, chief executive of the Sustainable Energy Association, said after Monday's brutal decision. "The renewable energy industry continues to be plagued by government decisions that lead to boom-bust cycles and fail to provide the conditions needed to grow the industry sustainably.
"While the SEA expects solar PV is likely to hit retail grid parity potentially by 2014-15, this interim period without some form of price support is likely to significantly erode the value and capability of the industry. The industry does not seek subsidies, just a fair price to be paid for consumers' exported electricity The provision of a fair price will create greater certainty and restore the confidence of solar installers to invest in growing their businesses, and consumers the confidence to buy". The raw politics of this decision are poisonous for the Barnett Government in the current economic climate.
Not only has it axed a program for being too popular a political non sequitur but it is seen to be stopping people from limiting their exposure to ever-increasing power price rises. Economic rationalists will rightly argue that home solar panels do not stack up in any direct comparison with commercial power generators.
The Productivity Commission found that a medium solar outfit produced power for around $400-$473/ MW compared with coal-fired electricity at $78-$91, combined-cycle gas turbines at $97 and wind turbines from $150-$214. But that doesn't take into account that private individuals are bearing the capital cost of the system and it frees up capacity in the existing low-cost State-owned generating system.
A well-priced feed-in tariff within a well-managed program with a realistic and expandable cap would have ensured a steady flow of privately sourced solar power at a lower cost than the Government could arrange through its own means to meet its renewable energy commitments. It is unlikely that the State will be able to extricate itself from ownership of its energy business any time soon. So its needs to get a lot smarter about how it handles the shift to renewables.
Solar solution missed
Herald Sun
3 August 2011, Page: 29
FLYING into Melbourne recently I was struck by the number of warehouse buildings with possibly thousands of hectares of north-facing roofs. Today I read that New York City is preparing a hyper accurate map to assess the building-by-building potential for solar panel installation.
So here's an idea: Could an entrepreneur, a solar power company and an electricity generator or retailer join forces to install large-scale solar power systems on warehouse roofs? Rental in the form of free or reduced-cost electricity could be paid to the warehouse owner, with excess energy being sold back into the grid. Has anyone done the numbers?
3 August 2011, Page: 29
FLYING into Melbourne recently I was struck by the number of warehouse buildings with possibly thousands of hectares of north-facing roofs. Today I read that New York City is preparing a hyper accurate map to assess the building-by-building potential for solar panel installation.
So here's an idea: Could an entrepreneur, a solar power company and an electricity generator or retailer join forces to install large-scale solar power systems on warehouse roofs? Rental in the form of free or reduced-cost electricity could be paid to the warehouse owner, with excess energy being sold back into the grid. Has anyone done the numbers?
Tuesday, 9 August 2011
Barnett axed solar power scheme to kill off a rush
West Australian
2 August 2011, Page: 12
The State Government was forced to shut its popular solar panel subsidy scheme yesterday to prevent a "run" on it from householders who feared they might miss out, Premier Colin Barnett said. A day after saying the feed-in-tariff scheme, which pays households for electricity from rooftop solar panels fed into the energy grid, was "being monitored", Energy Minister Peter Collier suspended it. The West Australian reported yesterday that the scheme would soon hit the Government's 150 MW capacity cap, imposed to prevent the cost getting out of control.
The industry believed the cap would be hit within weeks but Mr Collier, after discussing the issue with Mr Barnett yesterday, suspended it immediately. "The decision had to be made", Mr Barnett said. "It was on the front page of The West Australian. "Once that appeared we had to act, otherwise there would have been a run on the scheme".
The scheme has been slashed twice before and the industry and Opposition said ending it would cost hundreds of jobs. Mr Barnett conceded the Government could not say how much capacity had been approved for the scheme before yesterday, but he believed it had just about reached the cap.
Despite being forced to cancel new applications just 11 months after the scheme began, Mr Collier continued to insist it had been "phenomenally successful". Shadow energy minister Kate Doust said the decision made no sense and the Government had no credibility on the environment. "It's going to put further pressure on families who wanted to cut back on their power bills", she said.
Sustainable Energy Association chief Ray Wills said the scheme was axed without warning and would likely have significant short-term negative effects on the solar installation industry, He said the Government failed to consult the industry and this made it difficult to plan. Professor Wills said the renewable energy industry was plagued by government decisions that caused boom and bust cycles that did not let it grow sustainably.
2 August 2011, Page: 12
The State Government was forced to shut its popular solar panel subsidy scheme yesterday to prevent a "run" on it from householders who feared they might miss out, Premier Colin Barnett said. A day after saying the feed-in-tariff scheme, which pays households for electricity from rooftop solar panels fed into the energy grid, was "being monitored", Energy Minister Peter Collier suspended it. The West Australian reported yesterday that the scheme would soon hit the Government's 150 MW capacity cap, imposed to prevent the cost getting out of control.
The industry believed the cap would be hit within weeks but Mr Collier, after discussing the issue with Mr Barnett yesterday, suspended it immediately. "The decision had to be made", Mr Barnett said. "It was on the front page of The West Australian. "Once that appeared we had to act, otherwise there would have been a run on the scheme".
The scheme has been slashed twice before and the industry and Opposition said ending it would cost hundreds of jobs. Mr Barnett conceded the Government could not say how much capacity had been approved for the scheme before yesterday, but he believed it had just about reached the cap.
Despite being forced to cancel new applications just 11 months after the scheme began, Mr Collier continued to insist it had been "phenomenally successful". Shadow energy minister Kate Doust said the decision made no sense and the Government had no credibility on the environment. "It's going to put further pressure on families who wanted to cut back on their power bills", she said.
Sustainable Energy Association chief Ray Wills said the scheme was axed without warning and would likely have significant short-term negative effects on the solar installation industry, He said the Government failed to consult the industry and this made it difficult to plan. Professor Wills said the renewable energy industry was plagued by government decisions that caused boom and bust cycles that did not let it grow sustainably.
NZ trading scheme slashes carbon emissions
Age
Tuesday 2/8/2011 Page: 5
NEW Zealand's emissions trading scheme has helped boost investment in renewable energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to a review by the country's conservative government. It also appears to have won over a sceptical business community, with 63% of companies saying in submissions to a government panel they backed the climate scheme. Two years ago 78% were opposed.
Speaking in Wellington, New Zealand Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said there had been a "marked and positive shift" in business attitudes to the scheme. "This reflects the value of certainty the fact that critics overstated the costs of the scheme and the careful approach the government has taken to the transitional arrangements", he said.
While support for the scheme has grown, Dr Smith said it should be noted that 60% of businesses still argued the scheme should be slowed down. Only 15% wanted it sped up. He said the New Zealand National Party government hoped there would be a trans-Tasman carbon market with Australia after 2015. "The debate in New Zealand and in Australia on putting a price on carbon has been pretty ferocious, but it is a vital first step to the change we need to make as a society towards a low-carbon economy", Dr Smith said.
The first annual report into the NZ scheme which was largely based on former prime minister Kevin Rudd's abandoned emissions trading system found it had "performed to expectations". Nearly 80% of energy generation last year came from renewable sources a 12-year high that reflected both the impact of the carbon price and increased rainfall allowing greater use of hydropower power. Twelve new renewable energy plants were approved in 2010 five times the annual average across the past decade.
In forestry, incentives to maintain existing forests and invest in new plantations turned a net loss of about 18,000 hectares of trees in 2007 turned to an expected net increase of 5700 hectares this year. Dr Smith said national emissions had fallen for two consecutive years for the first time since 1990. The scheme included forestry from January 2008. Energy plants, large industry and transport were covered from July 2010, but initially pay a discounted carbon price of about $10 a tonne of gas emitted less than half the proposed Australian starting price of $23 a tonne.
Tuesday 2/8/2011 Page: 5
NEW Zealand's emissions trading scheme has helped boost investment in renewable energy and cut greenhouse gas emissions, according to a review by the country's conservative government. It also appears to have won over a sceptical business community, with 63% of companies saying in submissions to a government panel they backed the climate scheme. Two years ago 78% were opposed.
Speaking in Wellington, New Zealand Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said there had been a "marked and positive shift" in business attitudes to the scheme. "This reflects the value of certainty the fact that critics overstated the costs of the scheme and the careful approach the government has taken to the transitional arrangements", he said.
While support for the scheme has grown, Dr Smith said it should be noted that 60% of businesses still argued the scheme should be slowed down. Only 15% wanted it sped up. He said the New Zealand National Party government hoped there would be a trans-Tasman carbon market with Australia after 2015. "The debate in New Zealand and in Australia on putting a price on carbon has been pretty ferocious, but it is a vital first step to the change we need to make as a society towards a low-carbon economy", Dr Smith said.
The first annual report into the NZ scheme which was largely based on former prime minister Kevin Rudd's abandoned emissions trading system found it had "performed to expectations". Nearly 80% of energy generation last year came from renewable sources a 12-year high that reflected both the impact of the carbon price and increased rainfall allowing greater use of hydropower power. Twelve new renewable energy plants were approved in 2010 five times the annual average across the past decade.
In forestry, incentives to maintain existing forests and invest in new plantations turned a net loss of about 18,000 hectares of trees in 2007 turned to an expected net increase of 5700 hectares this year. Dr Smith said national emissions had fallen for two consecutive years for the first time since 1990. The scheme included forestry from January 2008. Energy plants, large industry and transport were covered from July 2010, but initially pay a discounted carbon price of about $10 a tonne of gas emitted less than half the proposed Australian starting price of $23 a tonne.
Reactor must go - PM for clean power
Sunday Mail Brisbane
31 July 2011, Page: 42
JAPAN'S Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, has pledged a "revolutionary" shift away from atomic power and towards renewable energy in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. His cabinet also agreed on a plan to rebuild after the quake and tsunami disaster of March 11, saying reconstruction would cost Y19 trillion ($222 billion) over five years. The embattled premier has been fighting calls to resign amid rock-bottom poll ratings.
He was speaking as more than 180,000 people in Niigata region and Fukushima were moved to evacuation centres after rains triggered floods that left five missing. "We have made a significant decision on energy policy, including nuclear power", Mr Kan said. "As a medium-term revolutionary energy and environmental strategy, we have decided to start a thorough review of nuclear power policy and draw a roadmap for a reduction of the dependence on nuclear power. "The Japanese government will aim for a society that does not depend on nuclear power".
Mr Kan, a one-time environmental activist, has pledged to boost alternative energy sources to 20% of the nation's energy mix by the 2020s. They currently make up about 9%. Medium-term goals until 2020 should include decentralised energy systems, with reduced nuclear use, he said.
31 July 2011, Page: 42
JAPAN'S Prime Minister, Naoto Kan, has pledged a "revolutionary" shift away from atomic power and towards renewable energy in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. His cabinet also agreed on a plan to rebuild after the quake and tsunami disaster of March 11, saying reconstruction would cost Y19 trillion ($222 billion) over five years. The embattled premier has been fighting calls to resign amid rock-bottom poll ratings.
He was speaking as more than 180,000 people in Niigata region and Fukushima were moved to evacuation centres after rains triggered floods that left five missing. "We have made a significant decision on energy policy, including nuclear power", Mr Kan said. "As a medium-term revolutionary energy and environmental strategy, we have decided to start a thorough review of nuclear power policy and draw a roadmap for a reduction of the dependence on nuclear power. "The Japanese government will aim for a society that does not depend on nuclear power".
Mr Kan, a one-time environmental activist, has pledged to boost alternative energy sources to 20% of the nation's energy mix by the 2020s. They currently make up about 9%. Medium-term goals until 2020 should include decentralised energy systems, with reduced nuclear use, he said.
Friday, 5 August 2011
Civic wind power plan widens focus
Hobart Mercury
29 July 2011, Page: 5
SOUTHERN Tasmanian councils are considering a $22 million proposal to generate their own wind power. The plan, put forward by Hobart City Council alderman Bill Harvey, suggests councils could cancel out their power bills by investing in wind turbines.
Aid Harvey said the Federal Government's $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation, coupled with Tasmania's Action Plan to Reduce Emissions, could provide the extra boost needed to get the idea across the line. He said Hobart aldermen were supportive, provided a wind farm stacked up financially and met high community standards.
The HCC last week posted letters to other southern Tasmanian councils asking if they wanted to participate. The councils are considering a report that proposes seven 2 MW turbines worth about $22 million or, if the HCC goes it alone, four turbines. Aid Harvey said the turbines could be scattered across several locations in the state. "The return to councils is looking quite positive", he said.
Aid Harvey, who first raised the idea last year, said by killing its own $3 million-a-year power bill, the HCC could add value for ratepayers or even provide rate relief. He said the HCC would make a decision whether to engage a consultant and to move the project to the next stage, with or without other councils, in the next few weeks. He said it was time for councils to get serious and stop messing around with token efforts such as tiny roof-top turbines or solar panels. "This would be pioneering. No other Australian council has yet to generate a significant amount of energy", he said.
Aid Harvey said individuals and businesses could also be invited to invest in wind turbines as shareholders alongside councils, following the example of a successful community co-operative wind farm near the Victorian towns of Daylesford and Hepburn Springs. The co-operative, supported by the Victorian Government, has built a wind farm that produces enough energy for 2300 households almost enough for all of the houses in the two districts.
29 July 2011, Page: 5
SOUTHERN Tasmanian councils are considering a $22 million proposal to generate their own wind power. The plan, put forward by Hobart City Council alderman Bill Harvey, suggests councils could cancel out their power bills by investing in wind turbines.
Aid Harvey said the Federal Government's $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation, coupled with Tasmania's Action Plan to Reduce Emissions, could provide the extra boost needed to get the idea across the line. He said Hobart aldermen were supportive, provided a wind farm stacked up financially and met high community standards.
The HCC last week posted letters to other southern Tasmanian councils asking if they wanted to participate. The councils are considering a report that proposes seven 2 MW turbines worth about $22 million or, if the HCC goes it alone, four turbines. Aid Harvey said the turbines could be scattered across several locations in the state. "The return to councils is looking quite positive", he said.
Aid Harvey, who first raised the idea last year, said by killing its own $3 million-a-year power bill, the HCC could add value for ratepayers or even provide rate relief. He said the HCC would make a decision whether to engage a consultant and to move the project to the next stage, with or without other councils, in the next few weeks. He said it was time for councils to get serious and stop messing around with token efforts such as tiny roof-top turbines or solar panels. "This would be pioneering. No other Australian council has yet to generate a significant amount of energy", he said.
Aid Harvey said individuals and businesses could also be invited to invest in wind turbines as shareholders alongside councils, following the example of a successful community co-operative wind farm near the Victorian towns of Daylesford and Hepburn Springs. The co-operative, supported by the Victorian Government, has built a wind farm that produces enough energy for 2300 households almost enough for all of the houses in the two districts.
Fracking push on hold after twin earthquakes
Australian
29 July 2011, Page: 22
MARK Miller was hoping to lead an energy revolution in Britain. Then earthquakes intervened. Mr Miller, an oil industry veteran from Pennsylvania, is one of a small band of pioneers seeking to replicate North America's shale gas boom in Europe. His company, Cuadrilla Resources, has imported a technology used to great effect in the US to try to turn Blackpool, a seaside resort on the west coast of England, into a new Klondike for gas.
The technology, called hydraulic fracturing, or 'Tracking", is controversial. It involves injecting huge volumes of water, sand and chemicals deep into porous shale rock, creating fissures or fractures that allow the gas trapped inside the rock to flow out. Critics worry that fracking can contaminate groundwater and even cause gas to leak from nearby household taps.
After months of cajoling, Mr Miller, a 57-year-old petroleum engineer, thought he had managed to persuade the locals that fracking was safe. Then, this northern spring, the area around Blackpool was shaken by two tremors. After the second, Cuadrilla Resources suspended its fracking operations, pending an investigation. Some researchers have delved into possible connections between fracking and earthquakes. But Cuadrilla Resources says no such connection has been proved, and Mr Miller says he is sceptical there is any link.
Even so, one of the most closely watched energy projects in Europe is now on hold, and the publicity has dealt a blow to the image of shale gas, already under attack from environmentalists on both sides of the Atlantic. The quakes left residents in the Blackpool area "angry and distressed", said Philip Mitchell, chairman of the local Green Party. "They have told me they feel like guinea pigs".
Some were more sanguine. "If they find gas then I don't think there's anything wrong with what they're doing", said one elderly man who lives in the village of Singleton, a stone's throw from the Cuadrilla Resources site. "I worked for years in the nuclear industry, so I'm not bothered by these things".
Fracking could bring a measure of energy independence to Europe by reducing its increased reliance on gas imported from countries such as Russia, which in the past has turned off the spigot over pricing disputes. But Cuadrilla Resources's tribulations show the challenges of developing shale gas deposits in Europe, where conventional gas reserves have declined. Europe is also more densely populated than the US, meaning a greater number of people would be likely to live near fracking sites.
Mr Miller likes to compare the county of Lancashire, where Singleton is located, to the Barnett, Marcellus and Haynesville shales in the US, where vast new gas reserves unlocked by fracking have transformed energy markets. When Cuadrilla Resources started drilling last year, "we were amazed at how thick the shale was", he says. "There was almost 1000 feet more of it than we'd expected, and the thicker the rock, the more gas there is".
The widespread use of fracking was a game-changer for the North American energy industry, allowing the US to become a net exporter of gas and, in 2009, to overtake Russia as the world's largest producer. Last year, the US pumped 4.87 trillion cubic feet of shale gas, equivalent to 23% of its total gas production. Europe, too, is thought to have huge production potential. One London think tank estimates there are enough recoverable reserves of unconventional gas in Europe to meet its gas demand "for at least another 60 years".
That potential has attracted some of the world's biggest energy companies. Exxon-Mobil has been chilling for shale gas in northern Germany. ConocoPhillips has teamed up with Britain's 3Legs Resources to explore in Poland's Baltic Basin. But there are many obstacles. Environmentalists in several countries, including Britain, are pushing to restrict fracking. And although the British government this week rejected calls for tough new controls on the practice, France last month became the first country to ban it completely.
Cuadrilla Resources, founded in 2007, was initially focused on shale gas in the US. But by then, land prices in the likeliest areas were already too high. So it shifted its focus to Europe instead. "We knew there was similar geology there", Mr Miller said. Britain, whose untapped shale reserves are thought to be substantial, seemed to be the perfect destination. With backing from Australian mining company ASLucas and US private equity firm Riverstone Holdings, Cuadrilla Resources acquired a licence covering 280,000 acres in Lancashire's Bowland Shale in 2008.
Last year, Cuadrilla Resources made Britain' first shale gas discovery near Blackpool. In the ensuing months, it started fracking there to see if it could get the gas to flow. The company says its procedures are safe. To prevent leaks into the local aquifer, it is drilling 1000 feet below the water table, underneath rock that has held back the gas for millions of years. "It would defy physics" for any of that gas to seep into ground water, Mr Miller said. Cuadrilla Resources also puts an extra layer of steel and cement into its wells to better isolate the exposed rock formations. But in the end, the biggest threat to Cuadrilla Resources's operations came from an unexpected source: the two small earthquakes that shook Lancashire on April 1 and May 27.
In Singleton, people had been generally supportive of fracking, but some changed their minds after the tremors. "They should have investigated how it could affect the earth before they went ahead", said one local woman. Cuadrilla Resources assembled a team of independent experts to determine if there was any link between fracking and the tremors, which it stressed had caused no damage and no physical injuiy. Meanwhile, Mr Miller began a series of public meetings to try to calm local jitters. The Cuadrilla Resources chief executive said he didn't expect to be quite so much in the public eye. "I thought it would all be about well design and raising finance", he said. "Sometimes you feel you're a spokesman for the global oil and gas industry".
29 July 2011, Page: 22
MARK Miller was hoping to lead an energy revolution in Britain. Then earthquakes intervened. Mr Miller, an oil industry veteran from Pennsylvania, is one of a small band of pioneers seeking to replicate North America's shale gas boom in Europe. His company, Cuadrilla Resources, has imported a technology used to great effect in the US to try to turn Blackpool, a seaside resort on the west coast of England, into a new Klondike for gas.
The technology, called hydraulic fracturing, or 'Tracking", is controversial. It involves injecting huge volumes of water, sand and chemicals deep into porous shale rock, creating fissures or fractures that allow the gas trapped inside the rock to flow out. Critics worry that fracking can contaminate groundwater and even cause gas to leak from nearby household taps.
After months of cajoling, Mr Miller, a 57-year-old petroleum engineer, thought he had managed to persuade the locals that fracking was safe. Then, this northern spring, the area around Blackpool was shaken by two tremors. After the second, Cuadrilla Resources suspended its fracking operations, pending an investigation. Some researchers have delved into possible connections between fracking and earthquakes. But Cuadrilla Resources says no such connection has been proved, and Mr Miller says he is sceptical there is any link.
Even so, one of the most closely watched energy projects in Europe is now on hold, and the publicity has dealt a blow to the image of shale gas, already under attack from environmentalists on both sides of the Atlantic. The quakes left residents in the Blackpool area "angry and distressed", said Philip Mitchell, chairman of the local Green Party. "They have told me they feel like guinea pigs".
Some were more sanguine. "If they find gas then I don't think there's anything wrong with what they're doing", said one elderly man who lives in the village of Singleton, a stone's throw from the Cuadrilla Resources site. "I worked for years in the nuclear industry, so I'm not bothered by these things".
Fracking could bring a measure of energy independence to Europe by reducing its increased reliance on gas imported from countries such as Russia, which in the past has turned off the spigot over pricing disputes. But Cuadrilla Resources's tribulations show the challenges of developing shale gas deposits in Europe, where conventional gas reserves have declined. Europe is also more densely populated than the US, meaning a greater number of people would be likely to live near fracking sites.
Mr Miller likes to compare the county of Lancashire, where Singleton is located, to the Barnett, Marcellus and Haynesville shales in the US, where vast new gas reserves unlocked by fracking have transformed energy markets. When Cuadrilla Resources started drilling last year, "we were amazed at how thick the shale was", he says. "There was almost 1000 feet more of it than we'd expected, and the thicker the rock, the more gas there is".
The widespread use of fracking was a game-changer for the North American energy industry, allowing the US to become a net exporter of gas and, in 2009, to overtake Russia as the world's largest producer. Last year, the US pumped 4.87 trillion cubic feet of shale gas, equivalent to 23% of its total gas production. Europe, too, is thought to have huge production potential. One London think tank estimates there are enough recoverable reserves of unconventional gas in Europe to meet its gas demand "for at least another 60 years".
That potential has attracted some of the world's biggest energy companies. Exxon-Mobil has been chilling for shale gas in northern Germany. ConocoPhillips has teamed up with Britain's 3Legs Resources to explore in Poland's Baltic Basin. But there are many obstacles. Environmentalists in several countries, including Britain, are pushing to restrict fracking. And although the British government this week rejected calls for tough new controls on the practice, France last month became the first country to ban it completely.
Cuadrilla Resources, founded in 2007, was initially focused on shale gas in the US. But by then, land prices in the likeliest areas were already too high. So it shifted its focus to Europe instead. "We knew there was similar geology there", Mr Miller said. Britain, whose untapped shale reserves are thought to be substantial, seemed to be the perfect destination. With backing from Australian mining company ASLucas and US private equity firm Riverstone Holdings, Cuadrilla Resources acquired a licence covering 280,000 acres in Lancashire's Bowland Shale in 2008.
Last year, Cuadrilla Resources made Britain' first shale gas discovery near Blackpool. In the ensuing months, it started fracking there to see if it could get the gas to flow. The company says its procedures are safe. To prevent leaks into the local aquifer, it is drilling 1000 feet below the water table, underneath rock that has held back the gas for millions of years. "It would defy physics" for any of that gas to seep into ground water, Mr Miller said. Cuadrilla Resources also puts an extra layer of steel and cement into its wells to better isolate the exposed rock formations. But in the end, the biggest threat to Cuadrilla Resources's operations came from an unexpected source: the two small earthquakes that shook Lancashire on April 1 and May 27.
In Singleton, people had been generally supportive of fracking, but some changed their minds after the tremors. "They should have investigated how it could affect the earth before they went ahead", said one local woman. Cuadrilla Resources assembled a team of independent experts to determine if there was any link between fracking and the tremors, which it stressed had caused no damage and no physical injuiy. Meanwhile, Mr Miller began a series of public meetings to try to calm local jitters. The Cuadrilla Resources chief executive said he didn't expect to be quite so much in the public eye. "I thought it would all be about well design and raising finance", he said. "Sometimes you feel you're a spokesman for the global oil and gas industry".
Explorer reassures investors
Adelaide Advertiser
29 July 2011, Page: 69
HOT rocks explorer GeoDynamics had $29.1 million in cash reserves at the end of the June quarter, it informed shareholders yesterday. The company last month reassured investors about its strong balance sheet-and access to the Federal Government's $90 million Renewable Energy Demonstration Program-to deliver value despite falling share prices.
Chief executive Geoff Ward this month said the company would be a "big winner" from the program, which would deliver benefits for the company's "long suffering shareholders". GeoDynamics is focusing on its 1 MW pilot plant at Innamincka to demonstrate the first power produced from an enhanced geothermal system early next year.
29 July 2011, Page: 69
HOT rocks explorer GeoDynamics had $29.1 million in cash reserves at the end of the June quarter, it informed shareholders yesterday. The company last month reassured investors about its strong balance sheet-and access to the Federal Government's $90 million Renewable Energy Demonstration Program-to deliver value despite falling share prices.
Chief executive Geoff Ward this month said the company would be a "big winner" from the program, which would deliver benefits for the company's "long suffering shareholders". GeoDynamics is focusing on its 1 MW pilot plant at Innamincka to demonstrate the first power produced from an enhanced geothermal system early next year.
Thursday, 4 August 2011
Export fans $300 million to SA
Adelaide Advertiser
27 July 2011, Page: 27
AN industry that did not exist in Adelaide a decade ago now manufactures and exports wind towers for a wind farm in Victoria. RPG Australia's manufacturing plant at Kilburn is constructing the towers for the Macarthur wind farm in southwest Victoria. The company has made about 600 towers for sites across South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia since 2002, injecting about $300 million into the SA economy. Federal Climate Change Minister Greg Combet and Premier Mike Rann inspected the factory yesterday. Mr Rann said 90 of the plant's 100 staff were working on wind turbine tower production, "an industry that didn't exist here a decade ago".
He said the old Mitsubishi site at Tonsley Park would be turned into a hub for innovative companies in sustainable technologies. "We are expecting Tonsley Park to attract $1 billion in private investment over 15 years, with up to 8600 people employed on the site and increasing the gross state product by $400 million a year by 2026", he said. "So now we have a new target of having 33% of our electricity generation come from renewable energy by 2020". Mr Combet said of the new Clean Energy Finance Corporation: "(It) will play a vital role in unlocking significant new private investment into clean energy projects and the supply chain that feeds into these projects".
27 July 2011, Page: 27
AN industry that did not exist in Adelaide a decade ago now manufactures and exports wind towers for a wind farm in Victoria. RPG Australia's manufacturing plant at Kilburn is constructing the towers for the Macarthur wind farm in southwest Victoria. The company has made about 600 towers for sites across South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia since 2002, injecting about $300 million into the SA economy. Federal Climate Change Minister Greg Combet and Premier Mike Rann inspected the factory yesterday. Mr Rann said 90 of the plant's 100 staff were working on wind turbine tower production, "an industry that didn't exist here a decade ago".He said the old Mitsubishi site at Tonsley Park would be turned into a hub for innovative companies in sustainable technologies. "We are expecting Tonsley Park to attract $1 billion in private investment over 15 years, with up to 8600 people employed on the site and increasing the gross state product by $400 million a year by 2026", he said. "So now we have a new target of having 33% of our electricity generation come from renewable energy by 2020". Mr Combet said of the new Clean Energy Finance Corporation: "(It) will play a vital role in unlocking significant new private investment into clean energy projects and the supply chain that feeds into these projects".
New Syngas China deal
Adelaide Advertiser
28 July 2011, Page: 69
SYNTHETIC fuel company Syngas has lined up a second potential Chinese partner, Kailuan Energy, for its coal gasification and biomass projects. The company signed a letter of intent with the Shanghai Stock Exchange-listed company yesterday in Melbourne to negotiate on possible investment options in Syngas or its projects, subject to regulatory approvals.
Syngas' current portfolio of projects, including the Clinton coal-to-liquid project 120km northwest of Adelaide, are covered by the agreement. Syngas has a similar understanding with the China National Electric Engineering Corporation to finalise an engineering, procurement and construction agreement by next March..
"This is a major development for Syngas. We now have the benefits of this relationship with Kailuan, as well as our existing CNEEC relationship", Syngas managing director Merrill Gray said. "We will be working diligently to bring significant value to shareholders through these relationships over the next few months". Kailuan Energy's main businesses are coal mining and coal beneficiation, logistics, machining and coal chemical.
28 July 2011, Page: 69
SYNTHETIC fuel company Syngas has lined up a second potential Chinese partner, Kailuan Energy, for its coal gasification and biomass projects. The company signed a letter of intent with the Shanghai Stock Exchange-listed company yesterday in Melbourne to negotiate on possible investment options in Syngas or its projects, subject to regulatory approvals.
Syngas' current portfolio of projects, including the Clinton coal-to-liquid project 120km northwest of Adelaide, are covered by the agreement. Syngas has a similar understanding with the China National Electric Engineering Corporation to finalise an engineering, procurement and construction agreement by next March..
"This is a major development for Syngas. We now have the benefits of this relationship with Kailuan, as well as our existing CNEEC relationship", Syngas managing director Merrill Gray said. "We will be working diligently to bring significant value to shareholders through these relationships over the next few months". Kailuan Energy's main businesses are coal mining and coal beneficiation, logistics, machining and coal chemical.
Hong Kong power firm has nuclear plant stake
Adelaide Advertiser
27 July 2011, Page: 57
HONG Kong utility CLP Group says it has bought a 17% stake in a nuclear power plant in southern China for $681 million. CLP Group said its nuclear investment unit signed a deal with China Guangdong Nuclear Power Company to buy the stake in the Yangjiang Nuclear Power Station. A total of $8.9 billion is being invested in the plant.
Construction started in 2008 on the 6000 MW plant in western Guangdong province, which consists of six 1000 MW pressurised water reactors. The plant, which is 220km west of Hong Kong, is expected to be completed in phases from 2013 to 2017. The electricity produced will be sold locally.
The two companies already operate the coastal Daya Bay nuclear plant, which is also in Guangdong and sends most of its power to Hong Kong. Beijing is promoting alternative energy sources such as nuclear, wind and solar to curb surging demand for imported oil and gas and to reduce environmental damage from heavy reliance on coal. However, government officials signalled the country's nuclear policy would prioritise safety following Japan's devastating nuclear crisis.
27 July 2011, Page: 57
HONG Kong utility CLP Group says it has bought a 17% stake in a nuclear power plant in southern China for $681 million. CLP Group said its nuclear investment unit signed a deal with China Guangdong Nuclear Power Company to buy the stake in the Yangjiang Nuclear Power Station. A total of $8.9 billion is being invested in the plant.
Construction started in 2008 on the 6000 MW plant in western Guangdong province, which consists of six 1000 MW pressurised water reactors. The plant, which is 220km west of Hong Kong, is expected to be completed in phases from 2013 to 2017. The electricity produced will be sold locally.
The two companies already operate the coastal Daya Bay nuclear plant, which is also in Guangdong and sends most of its power to Hong Kong. Beijing is promoting alternative energy sources such as nuclear, wind and solar to curb surging demand for imported oil and gas and to reduce environmental damage from heavy reliance on coal. However, government officials signalled the country's nuclear policy would prioritise safety following Japan's devastating nuclear crisis.
Wednesday, 3 August 2011
Pilot project under way to farm carbon
news.smh.com.au
July 26, 2011
A $13 million cattle station in the Northern Territory will be returned to its natural state in a bid to generate carbon credits. R.M.Williams Agriculture Holdings on Tuesday announced it had purchased Henbury Station, about 125km south of Alice Springs, with the help of the federal government's Caring for Country program to establish a new model for nature conservation and climate protection through carbon farming.
It is believed to be the first business in Australia to undertake such a move. Henbury, which covers 5000 km², is home to a range of rare and threatened native plants and animals, will be protected under Australia's National Reserve System. It will become part of the Territory Eco-Link conservation corridor, which spans from South Australia to the Arafura Sea north of Arnhem Land.
R.M.Williams Agricultural Holdings managing director David Pearse, in a statement released on Tuesday, described the project as "learning by doing". "We're in the business of sustainable agriculture and we see an exciting opportunity in carbon sequestration", he said. "By actively managing fire, water, weeds and feral animals on this former pastoral property we'll encourage natural revegetation, removing CO₂ from the atmosphere and storing carbon in the soil and native plants.
"We'll be creating sustainable habitat and enhancing biodiversity. "The development of the project will help to provide a new model for other farmers to improve their soil and native vegetation, and earn new income. "It will also help to create a new model for private sector investment in biodiversity conservation across the landscape. "Over the next year well be working with respected biodiversity and carbon advisers to establish a rigorous scientific methodology for carbon projects like Henbury".
Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency Mark Dreyfus welcomed the decision to rehabilitate Henbury Station, which is expected to be supported by the sale of credits that has been made possible through the government's carbon farming initiative.
"This is a key part of the Gillard government's climate change agenda, and is set to open up new income streams for farmers and landholders across regional Australia," he said. "Landholders and investors around the country will be ... looking to see how (they) go about the business of generating biodiverse carbon credits to support the regeneration of Henbury Station."
July 26, 2011
A $13 million cattle station in the Northern Territory will be returned to its natural state in a bid to generate carbon credits. R.M.Williams Agriculture Holdings on Tuesday announced it had purchased Henbury Station, about 125km south of Alice Springs, with the help of the federal government's Caring for Country program to establish a new model for nature conservation and climate protection through carbon farming.
It is believed to be the first business in Australia to undertake such a move. Henbury, which covers 5000 km², is home to a range of rare and threatened native plants and animals, will be protected under Australia's National Reserve System. It will become part of the Territory Eco-Link conservation corridor, which spans from South Australia to the Arafura Sea north of Arnhem Land.
R.M.Williams Agricultural Holdings managing director David Pearse, in a statement released on Tuesday, described the project as "learning by doing". "We're in the business of sustainable agriculture and we see an exciting opportunity in carbon sequestration", he said. "By actively managing fire, water, weeds and feral animals on this former pastoral property we'll encourage natural revegetation, removing CO₂ from the atmosphere and storing carbon in the soil and native plants.
"We'll be creating sustainable habitat and enhancing biodiversity. "The development of the project will help to provide a new model for other farmers to improve their soil and native vegetation, and earn new income. "It will also help to create a new model for private sector investment in biodiversity conservation across the landscape. "Over the next year well be working with respected biodiversity and carbon advisers to establish a rigorous scientific methodology for carbon projects like Henbury".
Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency Mark Dreyfus welcomed the decision to rehabilitate Henbury Station, which is expected to be supported by the sale of credits that has been made possible through the government's carbon farming initiative.
"This is a key part of the Gillard government's climate change agenda, and is set to open up new income streams for farmers and landholders across regional Australia," he said. "Landholders and investors around the country will be ... looking to see how (they) go about the business of generating biodiverse carbon credits to support the regeneration of Henbury Station."
Transition to renewable energy stimulates the economy
www.chem.info
25 July 2011
The disaster at Fukushima has raised public awareness and made the shift to renewable sources of energy more desirable than ever. It is accompanied, too, by a political willingness to rethink and correct the policies followed until now. The question is often posed in public debate as to whether the shift to renewable energies will be too expensive, or whether it indeed poses a threat to Germany's competitiveness as an industrial location.
Over the last two years, however, studies have suggested that fears of this sort are unfounded. On the contrary, according to an EU study performed by the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI in Karlsruhe, a shift towards renewable energies will stimulate growth in the job market in the coming decade. By 2020 scientists predict that some 2.8 million people will be employed in Europe's renewable energy sector, once implementation of EU objectives in this area has taken hold. The negative impact of a shift to alternative energy is far outweighed by the remaining positive net effect of some 400,000 additional jobs in the EU as a whole. What is more, Europe's GDP is expected to grow by 0.24% (some 35 billion Euro).
Similar results were reported in a study of Germany contracted by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety BMU, in which ISI scientists participated. One of the study's findings showed that, "the short and long-term effects on the German labor market derived from expansion of renewable energy use, indicate a positive trend. When all negative effects and influences on the economic cycle are taken into account, the number still falls in the range of 120,000--140,000 new jobs (2020, optimistic scenario, price path A)".
Read more...
25 July 2011
The disaster at Fukushima has raised public awareness and made the shift to renewable sources of energy more desirable than ever. It is accompanied, too, by a political willingness to rethink and correct the policies followed until now. The question is often posed in public debate as to whether the shift to renewable energies will be too expensive, or whether it indeed poses a threat to Germany's competitiveness as an industrial location.
Over the last two years, however, studies have suggested that fears of this sort are unfounded. On the contrary, according to an EU study performed by the Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research ISI in Karlsruhe, a shift towards renewable energies will stimulate growth in the job market in the coming decade. By 2020 scientists predict that some 2.8 million people will be employed in Europe's renewable energy sector, once implementation of EU objectives in this area has taken hold. The negative impact of a shift to alternative energy is far outweighed by the remaining positive net effect of some 400,000 additional jobs in the EU as a whole. What is more, Europe's GDP is expected to grow by 0.24% (some 35 billion Euro).
Similar results were reported in a study of Germany contracted by the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety BMU, in which ISI scientists participated. One of the study's findings showed that, "the short and long-term effects on the German labor market derived from expansion of renewable energy use, indicate a positive trend. When all negative effects and influences on the economic cycle are taken into account, the number still falls in the range of 120,000--140,000 new jobs (2020, optimistic scenario, price path A)".
Read more...
Fuel Cell Update: ClearEdge Grows, VC Flows
www.greentechmedia.com
July 25, 2011
ClearEdge Power is one of many aspirants looking to make technological progress and commercial inroads in the difficult fuel-cell market.
ClearEdge Power, headquartered in Oregon with more than 200 employees worldwide, builds proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel-cells that produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Investors include Applied Ventures, Big Basin Ventures and Kohlberg Ventures.
The firm builds 5 kW modules that target premium residential, small commercial and institutional stationary applications such as schools. Their PEM fuel-cell incorporates a reformer and runs off of natural gas like the Bloom Energy fuel-cell, although the Bloom Box is a solid oxide design, produces electricity and not heat, and comes in much larger 100 kW chunks.
I spoke with Mike Upp, the VP of Marketing at ClearEdge Power, and he said the deals currently being closed by the firm are in the 20 kW to 40 kW range and involve the use of numerous 5 kW boxes in a single configuration. Upp also claimed that in the "under 100 kW sweets pot" that ClearEdge Power services, "There is nobody else playing yet". Upp said that ClearEdge Power has 100 installations operating, almost all in California, about half in residential applications. But now ClearEdge Power is targeting light commercial by dint of its potential for more unit sales and repeat customers.
Like the hypetastic Bloom fuel-cell, the ClearEdge Power product is spendy. A 5 kW unit has a $56,000 list price and installation can run from $12,000 to $20,000. There is a $15,000 investment tax credit and California provides a $12,500 Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) rebate, although the SGIP program is currently under review. Even after incentives, the fuel-cell is expensive compared to the grid or to a diesel genset. Certainly, the thermal component has value for hot water production or enterprise heating.
According to the firm, the 5 kW unit generates a combined 83,300 kW of energy per year: 38,800 kW of electricity and 44,500 kW (equivalent to 152 MM BTUs per year of heat) of useable thermal energy. ClearEdge Power's Oregon factory can produce 2,500 units per year and can be upgraded to reach more than 10,000 units per year. Like all fuel-cell firms, ClearEdge Power must continue to drive down costs while improving its longterm reliability.
ClearEdge Power recently received $2.8 million from the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's Fuel Cell Technologies Program to deploy fuel-cells in a variety of commercial buildings. ClearEdge Power will install its CHP system at 10 vertical markets in California and Oregon, while Pacific Northwest National Laboratory will monitor the systems and measure the expected energy savings. Deployments are meant to be varied and include schools, a car dealership, a laundry and multifamily housing units. The program is about market transformation, the money is intended to defray the upfront cost of the units.
July 25, 2011
ClearEdge Power is one of many aspirants looking to make technological progress and commercial inroads in the difficult fuel-cell market.
ClearEdge Power, headquartered in Oregon with more than 200 employees worldwide, builds proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel-cells that produce electricity and heat from natural gas. Investors include Applied Ventures, Big Basin Ventures and Kohlberg Ventures.
The firm builds 5 kW modules that target premium residential, small commercial and institutional stationary applications such as schools. Their PEM fuel-cell incorporates a reformer and runs off of natural gas like the Bloom Energy fuel-cell, although the Bloom Box is a solid oxide design, produces electricity and not heat, and comes in much larger 100 kW chunks.
I spoke with Mike Upp, the VP of Marketing at ClearEdge Power, and he said the deals currently being closed by the firm are in the 20 kW to 40 kW range and involve the use of numerous 5 kW boxes in a single configuration. Upp also claimed that in the "under 100 kW sweets pot" that ClearEdge Power services, "There is nobody else playing yet". Upp said that ClearEdge Power has 100 installations operating, almost all in California, about half in residential applications. But now ClearEdge Power is targeting light commercial by dint of its potential for more unit sales and repeat customers.
Like the hypetastic Bloom fuel-cell, the ClearEdge Power product is spendy. A 5 kW unit has a $56,000 list price and installation can run from $12,000 to $20,000. There is a $15,000 investment tax credit and California provides a $12,500 Self Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) rebate, although the SGIP program is currently under review. Even after incentives, the fuel-cell is expensive compared to the grid or to a diesel genset. Certainly, the thermal component has value for hot water production or enterprise heating.
According to the firm, the 5 kW unit generates a combined 83,300 kW of energy per year: 38,800 kW of electricity and 44,500 kW (equivalent to 152 MM BTUs per year of heat) of useable thermal energy. ClearEdge Power's Oregon factory can produce 2,500 units per year and can be upgraded to reach more than 10,000 units per year. Like all fuel-cell firms, ClearEdge Power must continue to drive down costs while improving its longterm reliability.
ClearEdge Power recently received $2.8 million from the DOE's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy's Fuel Cell Technologies Program to deploy fuel-cells in a variety of commercial buildings. ClearEdge Power will install its CHP system at 10 vertical markets in California and Oregon, while Pacific Northwest National Laboratory will monitor the systems and measure the expected energy savings. Deployments are meant to be varied and include schools, a car dealership, a laundry and multifamily housing units. The program is about market transformation, the money is intended to defray the upfront cost of the units.
Thursday, 28 July 2011
Smoke and mirrors hide carbon truth
The Saturday Age
23 July 2011, Page: 17
IS IT any wonder that so many people are fed up with the climate change debate? Misinformation is rife you could fill a column like this most days wading through false claims and half truths.
Take just one example: this week a new body calling itself the Australian Trade and Industry Alliance launched an advertising campaign against the carbon price. On its web site, it says Australia's carbon scheme would be "by far the world's biggest" evidence, it says, that too high an impost is placed on business. It claims that the Australia scheme would haul in 14 times more revenue in its first few years than was generated under the existing European system $71 billion versus $4.9 billion.
But industry insiders say the only way it could reach these numbers is through a sleight of hand counting the large number of free carbon permits handed out to industry as revenue under the Australia scheme, but not under the European system. As one put it, this is "not exactly comparing apples with apples".
In interviews promoting the ads, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief Peter Anderson said the government's proposal is the world's only "economy wide" carbon price scheme. Which would be fine, except it's not economy wide it covers only 60% of emissions. Regardless, the greenhouse targets submitted to the UN by more than 100 countries are all economy wide.
Tony Abbott has spent the week being challenged on the contradictions in his stance on climate change. Campaigning in the Latrobe Valley this week, he made a separate claim worth testing: that there was "no reason" why Australia should not build new coalfired power plants.
Putting aside consideration of whether it is justifiable to build new greenhouse intensive power plants when Australia has a target to cut emissions by 5% by 2020, this position ignores the widely held view in the energy industry that noone is going to build new coal in Victoria, under any circumstances.
Coal power plants are decades long investments, and even if the carbon price was to fall over, no companies believe there won't eventually be policies introduced that make emissions intensive plant unviable. In fact, the industry has warned for years that electricity bills will rise faster without a carbon price than with it, due to the uncertainty over where to make future investments.
The suggestion that Australia could build new coal appears to be based on two misconceptions that Australia may stop cutting emissions once it reaches its 5% target in 2020, rather than building to an 80% cut by 2050, and that the world is not moving because China and India continue to build new coal plants.
The faltering push towards global action on climate change has long been underpinned by agreement that wealthy nations have benefited from centuries of greenhouse polluting industry, and should move first. Developing nations, including a rapidly expanding economy such as China, have longer to act. As Malcolm Turnbull pointed out this week, each Chinese is responsible for about one fifth of the emissions of each Australian. Australia continues to have the highest per capita emissions of any major developed nation.
Despite this, China is acting. It this week again signalled it would pilot an emissions trading scheme, expected to expand nationally in 2015. And estimates suggest it is on track to meet its UN target of a 4045% cut in emissions intensity by 2020. At some point soon after that it is going to have to do much more, but government bureaucrats have said its 2020 target equates to Australia cutting emissions by 25% by 2020 far more than either major party supports.
23 July 2011, Page: 17
IS IT any wonder that so many people are fed up with the climate change debate? Misinformation is rife you could fill a column like this most days wading through false claims and half truths.
Take just one example: this week a new body calling itself the Australian Trade and Industry Alliance launched an advertising campaign against the carbon price. On its web site, it says Australia's carbon scheme would be "by far the world's biggest" evidence, it says, that too high an impost is placed on business. It claims that the Australia scheme would haul in 14 times more revenue in its first few years than was generated under the existing European system $71 billion versus $4.9 billion.
But industry insiders say the only way it could reach these numbers is through a sleight of hand counting the large number of free carbon permits handed out to industry as revenue under the Australia scheme, but not under the European system. As one put it, this is "not exactly comparing apples with apples".
In interviews promoting the ads, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief Peter Anderson said the government's proposal is the world's only "economy wide" carbon price scheme. Which would be fine, except it's not economy wide it covers only 60% of emissions. Regardless, the greenhouse targets submitted to the UN by more than 100 countries are all economy wide.
Tony Abbott has spent the week being challenged on the contradictions in his stance on climate change. Campaigning in the Latrobe Valley this week, he made a separate claim worth testing: that there was "no reason" why Australia should not build new coalfired power plants.
Putting aside consideration of whether it is justifiable to build new greenhouse intensive power plants when Australia has a target to cut emissions by 5% by 2020, this position ignores the widely held view in the energy industry that noone is going to build new coal in Victoria, under any circumstances.
Coal power plants are decades long investments, and even if the carbon price was to fall over, no companies believe there won't eventually be policies introduced that make emissions intensive plant unviable. In fact, the industry has warned for years that electricity bills will rise faster without a carbon price than with it, due to the uncertainty over where to make future investments.
The suggestion that Australia could build new coal appears to be based on two misconceptions that Australia may stop cutting emissions once it reaches its 5% target in 2020, rather than building to an 80% cut by 2050, and that the world is not moving because China and India continue to build new coal plants.
The faltering push towards global action on climate change has long been underpinned by agreement that wealthy nations have benefited from centuries of greenhouse polluting industry, and should move first. Developing nations, including a rapidly expanding economy such as China, have longer to act. As Malcolm Turnbull pointed out this week, each Chinese is responsible for about one fifth of the emissions of each Australian. Australia continues to have the highest per capita emissions of any major developed nation.
Despite this, China is acting. It this week again signalled it would pilot an emissions trading scheme, expected to expand nationally in 2015. And estimates suggest it is on track to meet its UN target of a 4045% cut in emissions intensity by 2020. At some point soon after that it is going to have to do much more, but government bureaucrats have said its 2020 target equates to Australia cutting emissions by 25% by 2020 far more than either major party supports.
Wanted: Bright Sparks
Canberra Times
23 July 2011, Page: 1
Australia's solar industry is being dulled by a poor commitment towards developing a manufacturing plan.
Is Australia ready for a renewable energy revolution? Flip open (or scroll through) the Gillard Government's guide to its carbon pricing package, "Securing A Clean Energy Future", at chapter six, which begins by emphasising the import of innovation. To tackle climate change, Australia needs to transform its energy sector", the guide says. Our nation is well placed to make this change. We have world class scientists and researchers. We have a dynamic and competitive business and private sector. And we have abundant resources of renewable energy".
What we don't have is a renewable energy manufacturing policy. Like the amiable childrens' cartoon character Bob the Builder, we can dig it, fix it, build it and almost certainly install it, but can we make it? At this stage, probably not. Our wind turbines are likely to be imported from China, where Danish company Vesta has just built a new factory in Mongolia that will churn out 800 turbines a year just for the emerging Mongolian wind farm market.
In Canberra, households that joined the rush to take advantage of the ACT Government's generous feed in tariff for photovoltaics, are likely to have bought cut price solar panels imported from China or India. Do these panels meet Australian standards? That could be considered a trick question. It is important you ask your accredited installer to provide proof that your panels meet Australian standards", says an online consumer guide published by the Clean Energy Council.
But what are the Australian standards? According to the Standards Australia website, the status of Australian standards for photovoltaic panels and their installation remains a complex work in progress. The council maintains a database and website listing of photovoltaic modules that comply with recently updated Australian standards, but there are multiple standards not just one because a solar array is the sum of many parts.
The council's consumer guide explains imported solar panels are subjected to an inspection and accreditation process in test laboratories to ensure they meet international standards. And its website lists all test laboratories approved to issue certifications, obviously, none are in Australia, and the convoluted paper trail looks as if it could have the potential to become, to quote a memorable phrase from the Federal Government's botched insulation inquiry, a "tick and flick" exercise.
Clearly, the rules governing renewables are still evolving. In its latest newsletter, the council warns a number of its member companies are using the council logo in marketing and promotional material. "We are concerned that, in some instances, some companies may be using the logo inappropriately. This has the potential to confuse and mislead consumers seeking information and assurance regarding clean energy products and services", the newsletter says.
Another consumer website, Energy Matters, cautions buyers to check package deals on solar panels. "Package deals are a great way to save cash, but not all packages are created equal. For example, a company might use top quality solar panels, but skimp on the inverter, wire and frame quality in the hope that the panel brand name will dazzle you and you'll ignore the other components. When comparing solar panel packages, do so on a component by component basis, not just the modules".
Australia's only solar panel manufacturer, Sydney based company Silex Systems, has increased production of solar cells and modules by 300% in the past year, but estimates it only has about 2% of the local market The company's chief executive Michael Goldsworthy has previously argued that federal and state incentives, chiefly feed in tariffs and Renewable Energy Certificates for household installations, "really helped the Chinese manufacturers sell panels at the expense of local manufacturers". Goldsworthy has suggested Australia might consider a system based on a Canadian model, where a premium feed in tariff applies to locally manufactured solar systems.
"There's a critical mass required to have an industry really take off", Australian National University sustainable energy systems director Professor Andrew Blakers says. "Australia now has a large solar installation industry employing more than 10,000 people, and that market means we've got a lot of people who understand how solar modules work. But it would be really good to have encouragement from government to support solar module and solar cell manufacture. What we need to do is gradually extend the industry right through the value chain, starting from silicon refining, all the way through to installing and maintaining the system on your roof".
But the future of renewable manufacturing in Australia will depend on political stability, he says. "It's been a chaotic business. Going back over the last 10 years, the Australian solar industry has been through a disconcerting series of stops and starts, primarily at the federal level. There'll be some wonderful subsidy scheme, which runs for a couple of years, then suddenly stops, and all of the people who know what's going on disappear. Then it starts up again. Everyone has been burned, that's why there are few stayers in the industry".
Blakers has been one of Australia's tenacious solar stayers, weathering almost 15 years of frustration to bring a breakthrough solar cell technology to commercialisation. The world first technology began to take shape in 1996, when Blakers and ANU research engineer Professor Klaus Weber invented a technique called epilift which enabled them to grow a thin, high quality silicon layer on a silicon wafer, peel off the grown layer and convert it into a solar cell and keep recycling the original layer through a series of growth and peel cycles. Epilift was revolutionary but was still an expensive process.
Travelling on a Glasgow train while attending an international conference, the co-inventors came up with a better idea, a SLIVER-modules" target="_blank">SLIVER cell. The SLIVER technology eliminated the need for machinery to grow and peel the silicon, cutting processing costs and silicon use.
The ANU solar SLIVER cell technology won numerous Australian innovation and clean energy awards. It secured its first sizeable slice of federal funding in 2005, with a $5 million Renewable Energy Development grant to help deliver the technology to local and global markets. The wafer thin SLIVER cells are tipped to lead a global energy revolution by cutting the cost and size of solar panels, and making solar power more affordable and portable.
In 2006, Blakers and Weber were awarded one of Australia's top science prizes, the Sir Alan Walsh Medal, by the Australian Institute of Physics for their revolutionary solar technology. The medal, which honours the Australian inventor of atomic absorption spectrophotometry, a simple, rapid and inexpensive method for analysing minute traces of metals, is awarded to an invention which the institute believes will lead to "significant industrial and commercial outcome". It was the ANU SLIVER cell duo's fifth major award in two years.
"What we've been able to do is come up with a technology that will cut the cost of photovoltaic panels by three quarters", Blakers said at the time the award was announced. At that stage, Origin Energy had invested more than $30 million in building a pilot manufacturing plant in Adelaide but needed high-tech engineering skills and an investment partner to accelerate largescale commercial production.
The following year, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki visited the ANU laboratory where the SLIVER cells were developed. In an address to the National Press Club the next day, he talked of the global contribution the technology could make to cutting greenhouse emissions. "But I gather it's on the verge of being sold to an international corporation and you're going to end up buying back an Australian technology which I think is scandalous and disgraceful", he said.
Last year, Origin Energy and United States company Micron Technology announced they had formed a joint venture partnership with "a focus on the development of photovoltaic technology". Last month, the mayor of Boise, Idaho, announced plans to build a 10 MW photovoltaic power plant at a cost of $U545 million ($A41.5 million) to help the city retain manufacturing jobs. The Idaho Statesman newspaper reported the state has recently lost a bid to be the site for a new clean energy manufacturing plant because the state chosen, Colorado, "was considered green and Idaho was not". The photovoltaic plant was an attempt to change that reputation.
Weeks later, Boise company Transform Solar (the joint venture between Origin Energy and Micron) announced plans to "bring thin film solar cell production" to the city. An old computer chip plant belonging to Micron will be converted to manufacture the solar cells, which will be assembled into solar panels at a separate plant in Nampa, Idaho", a local news report says.
"SLIVER solar cells are made with monocrystalline silicon, but require much less of the semiconductor than conventional crystalline silicon cells, reducing material costs by 90%. They are 50 microns thick (less than two thousandths of an inch) and able to collect solar power on both sides of the cell. They are the thinnest solar cells currently in production. "Transform Solar has already hired 70 workers to operate the plant and plans to hire up to 50 more". And yes, the SLIVER cells will be part of the new $US45 million photovoltaic power plant in a state that's usually associated with potatoes.
Origin Energy has closed the Adelaide pilot plant that was purpose built to test commercialising the solar SLIVER cells, and some of the 62 staff employed there will be transferring to Boise. Blakers says the move "is understandable". He will still be involved with the SLIVER technology and the ANU has $6 million in research contracts with the new US venture. This is the first largescale commercialisation I've been involved in, and you always underestimate how long it takes and how much effort it takes", he says.
"Origin Energy set up a pilot plant in Adelaide and got a long way down the track towards having a commercial product, but they needed to find a place to manufacture it. While looking around they found Micron, which had a large, mothballed semiconductor manufacturing plant in Boise Idaho, that was well suited to making SLIVER-modules". So it became clear the next step up from the Adelaide pilot plant was to move operations to this mothballed factory and retrofit the required machines".
Australia needs to develop and commit to a renewable energy manufacturing plan, he says. "How about we have a government manufacturing plan? We have a car manufacturing plan, so why not say 'let's be big in solar manufacturing' and sit down and work it out. "We can't expect a globally competitive Australian solar industry to evolve on its own.
We need to build the industry from start to finish, we need the technical education for tradies putting in the systems, we need the undergraduate education to train process engineers, and the PhDs for research. We've got the basics and it could be expanded fast if we decide we want a solar industry". A recent KPMG investment report on global renewable energy deals says a record 141 renewable energy merger and acquisition deals worth $US11.2 billion ($A10.1 billion) were announced in the first quarter of 2011. Last year 446 renewable energy deals were completed, a 70% increase on the previous year.
"Clearly, incentives for renewable energy in Australia are as important as ever. While there have been some incentives available over the past decade, certainty over a carbon price is critical to the industry developing over the coming years", KPMG renewables analyst Matthew Herring said. Blakers says it "would be very nice" if federal policy could encourage local manufacture, and also points to the need for a national feed in tariff. The ACT Government's feed in tariff was "excessively generous" and created a bubble market that "didn't allow the industry to develop in a more sensible and controlled fashion".
Now that the bubble has burst, "the industry will consolidate and in a year or two, there will be maybe a dozen national brands for installers that are trusted", he says. So, can we build it if we have a longterm national commitment to renewable manufacturing? "We can, if we decide that's what we want, and industry has the certainty of a carbon price. And we need a national feed in tariff so everyone knows what the rules are, and everyone can do their sums without excessive risks and hazard from political change".
23 July 2011, Page: 1
Australia's solar industry is being dulled by a poor commitment towards developing a manufacturing plan.Is Australia ready for a renewable energy revolution? Flip open (or scroll through) the Gillard Government's guide to its carbon pricing package, "Securing A Clean Energy Future", at chapter six, which begins by emphasising the import of innovation. To tackle climate change, Australia needs to transform its energy sector", the guide says. Our nation is well placed to make this change. We have world class scientists and researchers. We have a dynamic and competitive business and private sector. And we have abundant resources of renewable energy".
What we don't have is a renewable energy manufacturing policy. Like the amiable childrens' cartoon character Bob the Builder, we can dig it, fix it, build it and almost certainly install it, but can we make it? At this stage, probably not. Our wind turbines are likely to be imported from China, where Danish company Vesta has just built a new factory in Mongolia that will churn out 800 turbines a year just for the emerging Mongolian wind farm market.
In Canberra, households that joined the rush to take advantage of the ACT Government's generous feed in tariff for photovoltaics, are likely to have bought cut price solar panels imported from China or India. Do these panels meet Australian standards? That could be considered a trick question. It is important you ask your accredited installer to provide proof that your panels meet Australian standards", says an online consumer guide published by the Clean Energy Council.
But what are the Australian standards? According to the Standards Australia website, the status of Australian standards for photovoltaic panels and their installation remains a complex work in progress. The council maintains a database and website listing of photovoltaic modules that comply with recently updated Australian standards, but there are multiple standards not just one because a solar array is the sum of many parts.
The council's consumer guide explains imported solar panels are subjected to an inspection and accreditation process in test laboratories to ensure they meet international standards. And its website lists all test laboratories approved to issue certifications, obviously, none are in Australia, and the convoluted paper trail looks as if it could have the potential to become, to quote a memorable phrase from the Federal Government's botched insulation inquiry, a "tick and flick" exercise.
Clearly, the rules governing renewables are still evolving. In its latest newsletter, the council warns a number of its member companies are using the council logo in marketing and promotional material. "We are concerned that, in some instances, some companies may be using the logo inappropriately. This has the potential to confuse and mislead consumers seeking information and assurance regarding clean energy products and services", the newsletter says.
Another consumer website, Energy Matters, cautions buyers to check package deals on solar panels. "Package deals are a great way to save cash, but not all packages are created equal. For example, a company might use top quality solar panels, but skimp on the inverter, wire and frame quality in the hope that the panel brand name will dazzle you and you'll ignore the other components. When comparing solar panel packages, do so on a component by component basis, not just the modules".
Australia's only solar panel manufacturer, Sydney based company Silex Systems, has increased production of solar cells and modules by 300% in the past year, but estimates it only has about 2% of the local market The company's chief executive Michael Goldsworthy has previously argued that federal and state incentives, chiefly feed in tariffs and Renewable Energy Certificates for household installations, "really helped the Chinese manufacturers sell panels at the expense of local manufacturers". Goldsworthy has suggested Australia might consider a system based on a Canadian model, where a premium feed in tariff applies to locally manufactured solar systems.
"There's a critical mass required to have an industry really take off", Australian National University sustainable energy systems director Professor Andrew Blakers says. "Australia now has a large solar installation industry employing more than 10,000 people, and that market means we've got a lot of people who understand how solar modules work. But it would be really good to have encouragement from government to support solar module and solar cell manufacture. What we need to do is gradually extend the industry right through the value chain, starting from silicon refining, all the way through to installing and maintaining the system on your roof".
But the future of renewable manufacturing in Australia will depend on political stability, he says. "It's been a chaotic business. Going back over the last 10 years, the Australian solar industry has been through a disconcerting series of stops and starts, primarily at the federal level. There'll be some wonderful subsidy scheme, which runs for a couple of years, then suddenly stops, and all of the people who know what's going on disappear. Then it starts up again. Everyone has been burned, that's why there are few stayers in the industry".
Blakers has been one of Australia's tenacious solar stayers, weathering almost 15 years of frustration to bring a breakthrough solar cell technology to commercialisation. The world first technology began to take shape in 1996, when Blakers and ANU research engineer Professor Klaus Weber invented a technique called epilift which enabled them to grow a thin, high quality silicon layer on a silicon wafer, peel off the grown layer and convert it into a solar cell and keep recycling the original layer through a series of growth and peel cycles. Epilift was revolutionary but was still an expensive process.
Travelling on a Glasgow train while attending an international conference, the co-inventors came up with a better idea, a SLIVER-modules" target="_blank">SLIVER cell. The SLIVER technology eliminated the need for machinery to grow and peel the silicon, cutting processing costs and silicon use.
The ANU solar SLIVER cell technology won numerous Australian innovation and clean energy awards. It secured its first sizeable slice of federal funding in 2005, with a $5 million Renewable Energy Development grant to help deliver the technology to local and global markets. The wafer thin SLIVER cells are tipped to lead a global energy revolution by cutting the cost and size of solar panels, and making solar power more affordable and portable.
In 2006, Blakers and Weber were awarded one of Australia's top science prizes, the Sir Alan Walsh Medal, by the Australian Institute of Physics for their revolutionary solar technology. The medal, which honours the Australian inventor of atomic absorption spectrophotometry, a simple, rapid and inexpensive method for analysing minute traces of metals, is awarded to an invention which the institute believes will lead to "significant industrial and commercial outcome". It was the ANU SLIVER cell duo's fifth major award in two years.
"What we've been able to do is come up with a technology that will cut the cost of photovoltaic panels by three quarters", Blakers said at the time the award was announced. At that stage, Origin Energy had invested more than $30 million in building a pilot manufacturing plant in Adelaide but needed high-tech engineering skills and an investment partner to accelerate largescale commercial production.
The following year, Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki visited the ANU laboratory where the SLIVER cells were developed. In an address to the National Press Club the next day, he talked of the global contribution the technology could make to cutting greenhouse emissions. "But I gather it's on the verge of being sold to an international corporation and you're going to end up buying back an Australian technology which I think is scandalous and disgraceful", he said.
Last year, Origin Energy and United States company Micron Technology announced they had formed a joint venture partnership with "a focus on the development of photovoltaic technology". Last month, the mayor of Boise, Idaho, announced plans to build a 10 MW photovoltaic power plant at a cost of $U545 million ($A41.5 million) to help the city retain manufacturing jobs. The Idaho Statesman newspaper reported the state has recently lost a bid to be the site for a new clean energy manufacturing plant because the state chosen, Colorado, "was considered green and Idaho was not". The photovoltaic plant was an attempt to change that reputation.
Weeks later, Boise company Transform Solar (the joint venture between Origin Energy and Micron) announced plans to "bring thin film solar cell production" to the city. An old computer chip plant belonging to Micron will be converted to manufacture the solar cells, which will be assembled into solar panels at a separate plant in Nampa, Idaho", a local news report says.
"SLIVER solar cells are made with monocrystalline silicon, but require much less of the semiconductor than conventional crystalline silicon cells, reducing material costs by 90%. They are 50 microns thick (less than two thousandths of an inch) and able to collect solar power on both sides of the cell. They are the thinnest solar cells currently in production. "Transform Solar has already hired 70 workers to operate the plant and plans to hire up to 50 more". And yes, the SLIVER cells will be part of the new $US45 million photovoltaic power plant in a state that's usually associated with potatoes.
Origin Energy has closed the Adelaide pilot plant that was purpose built to test commercialising the solar SLIVER cells, and some of the 62 staff employed there will be transferring to Boise. Blakers says the move "is understandable". He will still be involved with the SLIVER technology and the ANU has $6 million in research contracts with the new US venture. This is the first largescale commercialisation I've been involved in, and you always underestimate how long it takes and how much effort it takes", he says.
"Origin Energy set up a pilot plant in Adelaide and got a long way down the track towards having a commercial product, but they needed to find a place to manufacture it. While looking around they found Micron, which had a large, mothballed semiconductor manufacturing plant in Boise Idaho, that was well suited to making SLIVER-modules". So it became clear the next step up from the Adelaide pilot plant was to move operations to this mothballed factory and retrofit the required machines".
Australia needs to develop and commit to a renewable energy manufacturing plan, he says. "How about we have a government manufacturing plan? We have a car manufacturing plan, so why not say 'let's be big in solar manufacturing' and sit down and work it out. "We can't expect a globally competitive Australian solar industry to evolve on its own.
We need to build the industry from start to finish, we need the technical education for tradies putting in the systems, we need the undergraduate education to train process engineers, and the PhDs for research. We've got the basics and it could be expanded fast if we decide we want a solar industry". A recent KPMG investment report on global renewable energy deals says a record 141 renewable energy merger and acquisition deals worth $US11.2 billion ($A10.1 billion) were announced in the first quarter of 2011. Last year 446 renewable energy deals were completed, a 70% increase on the previous year.
"Clearly, incentives for renewable energy in Australia are as important as ever. While there have been some incentives available over the past decade, certainty over a carbon price is critical to the industry developing over the coming years", KPMG renewables analyst Matthew Herring said. Blakers says it "would be very nice" if federal policy could encourage local manufacture, and also points to the need for a national feed in tariff. The ACT Government's feed in tariff was "excessively generous" and created a bubble market that "didn't allow the industry to develop in a more sensible and controlled fashion".
Now that the bubble has burst, "the industry will consolidate and in a year or two, there will be maybe a dozen national brands for installers that are trusted", he says. So, can we build it if we have a longterm national commitment to renewable manufacturing? "We can, if we decide that's what we want, and industry has the certainty of a carbon price. And we need a national feed in tariff so everyone knows what the rules are, and everyone can do their sums without excessive risks and hazard from political change".
Glad to see island reap the wind
Sunday Tasmanian
24 July 2011, Page: 3
PRIME Minister Julia Gillard made a whirlwind trip to King Island yesterday to explore renewable energy systems before landing in Hobart for forestry talks with Premier Lara Giddings. The residents of the Bass Strait island were the first in the state to discuss with the Prime Minister her plans to put a tax on carbon. Ms Gillard said the remote island provided successful examples of how renewable energy could be used into the future.
"What we want to see is less carbon pollution", she said. "What we want to see is a clean energy future and putting a price on carbon pollution will drive new investments and new opportunities in that clean energy future. "The island was originally powered by 100% diesel and they've taken steps over time to harness the abundant wind and the solar power that falls on the island, so now 40% of the power used is generated by renewables. "It's this kind of movement to clean energy sources that putting a price on carbon is all about".
There are plans on King Island to take further steps to increase its clean energy mix, moving to 60% or 70% King Island Mayor Charles Arnold said the Prime Minister was impressed with the region's established renewable energy systems. Ms Gillard is only the second prime minister to visit King Island and the first in more than 50 years. Then prime minister Robert Menzies visited the island in 1961. Ms Gillard spent about two hours on the island and shared breakfast with people from the community.
Melanie Graham questioned the Prime Minister about the rising costs of living. Ms Gi Bard said that was why she was out and about talking to Australians about putting a price on carbon pollution, to answer questions and relieve uncertainty. "Economists have told us and told us consistently that putting a price on carbon pollution, to be paid by the biggest polluters, is the most efficient way of cutting carbon pollution and creating a clean energy future", she said.
24 July 2011, Page: 3
PRIME Minister Julia Gillard made a whirlwind trip to King Island yesterday to explore renewable energy systems before landing in Hobart for forestry talks with Premier Lara Giddings. The residents of the Bass Strait island were the first in the state to discuss with the Prime Minister her plans to put a tax on carbon. Ms Gillard said the remote island provided successful examples of how renewable energy could be used into the future.
"What we want to see is less carbon pollution", she said. "What we want to see is a clean energy future and putting a price on carbon pollution will drive new investments and new opportunities in that clean energy future. "The island was originally powered by 100% diesel and they've taken steps over time to harness the abundant wind and the solar power that falls on the island, so now 40% of the power used is generated by renewables. "It's this kind of movement to clean energy sources that putting a price on carbon is all about".
There are plans on King Island to take further steps to increase its clean energy mix, moving to 60% or 70% King Island Mayor Charles Arnold said the Prime Minister was impressed with the region's established renewable energy systems. Ms Gillard is only the second prime minister to visit King Island and the first in more than 50 years. Then prime minister Robert Menzies visited the island in 1961. Ms Gillard spent about two hours on the island and shared breakfast with people from the community.
Melanie Graham questioned the Prime Minister about the rising costs of living. Ms Gi Bard said that was why she was out and about talking to Australians about putting a price on carbon pollution, to answer questions and relieve uncertainty. "Economists have told us and told us consistently that putting a price on carbon pollution, to be paid by the biggest polluters, is the most efficient way of cutting carbon pollution and creating a clean energy future", she said.
Sunday, 24 July 2011
Hydro waves farewell to ocean electricity
Hobart Mercury
21 July 2011, Page: 19
Hydro Tasmania yesterday reaffirmed its commitment to wind power but not ocean wave energy. The Tasmanian owned electricity generator has chosen not to accept an invitation from Sydney company Oceanlinx to participate in wave energy developments on King Island. Oceanlinx has developed a semisubmerged box structure that uses the up and down motion of waves to suck and blow air through a turbine.
It already has demonstrator units operating off Australia's east coast and it is selling power into a grid. Oceanlinx chief technology officer Tom Denniss said the company's efforts to introduce wave energy to King Island were supported by the local council and community. Mr Denniss said Hydro indicated that it was only prepared to buy wave energy at times when it couldn't get enough power from its wind and solar generators to meet the island's needs. He said on that basis it was impossible for Oceanlinx to finance a wave unit.
21 July 2011, Page: 19
Hydro Tasmania yesterday reaffirmed its commitment to wind power but not ocean wave energy. The Tasmanian owned electricity generator has chosen not to accept an invitation from Sydney company Oceanlinx to participate in wave energy developments on King Island. Oceanlinx has developed a semisubmerged box structure that uses the up and down motion of waves to suck and blow air through a turbine.
It already has demonstrator units operating off Australia's east coast and it is selling power into a grid. Oceanlinx chief technology officer Tom Denniss said the company's efforts to introduce wave energy to King Island were supported by the local council and community. Mr Denniss said Hydro indicated that it was only prepared to buy wave energy at times when it couldn't get enough power from its wind and solar generators to meet the island's needs. He said on that basis it was impossible for Oceanlinx to finance a wave unit.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)