It has been another record year for newly installed wind capacity – to the tune of 39.4 GW. The year 2010 brought total installed capacity worldwide to around 200,000 MW, an impressive increase in cumulative worldwide installations of some 25 percent. However, in terms of the volume of annual installed capacity the increase was a far more modest three percent.
For the industry as a whole, the year-on-year growth rate in 2010 in fact decreased from 35 percent in 2009 to just 3%. Remarkably, it is the first year that the market has shown a slowdown in growth since 2004.
China made the greatest contribution to the global wind power installations in 2010 and it is important to note that 48 percent of the world's installations over the year took place in the country. Consolidation among turbine suppliers has been a particularly strong feature over the past three years.
It is worth noting that 2010 also saw more MW-rated Chinese manufactured turbines exported. During the year, five Chinese turbine suppliers installed 13 machines in five different foreign markets.
Asia experienced significant growth, including the OECD Pacific region which increased its cumulative capacity from 42,037 MW in 2009 to 63,645 MW in 2010, a growth of 51.4 percent. China was by far and away the leading country, with 18,928 MW of new capacity in 2010. India also saw an increase to see 2139 MW of new installations. The region as a whole accounted for 54.8 percent of the year's global total.
The offshore sector has expanded, with a total capacity of 1444 MW installed in 2010, which represents a 109 percent annual increase. Nine new offshore wind farms, with a combined power generating capacity of 1405 MW, were installed in Europe, especially the UK. The remainder of new offshore capacity was in China.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
CSP promises
Sometimes problems have simple solutions that do not need new rocket science tech! It is simply about assemblage and simplification of known elements.
Researchers at MIT are designing a new method of building concentrating solar power plants with thermal storage that they say could lower the cost of energy by 50% compared with existing technologies. MIT Mechanical Engineering Professor Alexander Slocum – along with a group of other researchers – says he’s designed a new type of tank for molten salt storage that could reduce equipment needs, increase durability and ultimately reduce the cost of electricity being generated by a plant.
Rather than use a complicated plumbing infrastructure to heat and pump the molten salt for storage, Slocum’s design puts the salt storage and water heating in a single tank mounted on the ground, rather than on a tower far above the field of mirrors. Under the new design, the mirrors are actually mounted on a hillside above the storage tank and reflect sunlight down into a small opening in the top.
Not only does the design ensure minimum parts but is also more durable as it avoids extreme swings in temperature on the system (to avoid which systems are usually oversized).
The use of storage like molten salt will be key to the success of the industry, experts say. To make real progress with deploying these technologies, you need to have the dispatchable characteristics like firm power. CSP is different from PV and can provide power at twilight, so to say!
Researchers at MIT are designing a new method of building concentrating solar power plants with thermal storage that they say could lower the cost of energy by 50% compared with existing technologies. MIT Mechanical Engineering Professor Alexander Slocum – along with a group of other researchers – says he’s designed a new type of tank for molten salt storage that could reduce equipment needs, increase durability and ultimately reduce the cost of electricity being generated by a plant.
Rather than use a complicated plumbing infrastructure to heat and pump the molten salt for storage, Slocum’s design puts the salt storage and water heating in a single tank mounted on the ground, rather than on a tower far above the field of mirrors. Under the new design, the mirrors are actually mounted on a hillside above the storage tank and reflect sunlight down into a small opening in the top.
Not only does the design ensure minimum parts but is also more durable as it avoids extreme swings in temperature on the system (to avoid which systems are usually oversized).
The use of storage like molten salt will be key to the success of the industry, experts say. To make real progress with deploying these technologies, you need to have the dispatchable characteristics like firm power. CSP is different from PV and can provide power at twilight, so to say!
Wind in your sails!
The global power sector is the largest industrial water user, and it has to start addressing the issue of water consumption, especially in the light of rising electricity demand, and increasing droughts created by the world’s changing climate.
And, to mitigate climate change, the power sector not only needs to become CO2 free, but also reduce its water consumption.
Thermal power systems are based upon what is known as the Rankin cycle. Often, steam is used to power turbines, but then it must be cooled to become liquid. Coal, Nuclear, or even solar power could be used to heat the steam, but tremendous amounts of water are usually required for cooling. In many places, that water is in very short supply or essential for our domestic water needs and agriculture. A shortage of water would require such power stations operate at less than full capacity.
Conventional fossil fuel and nuclear power plants make up 78% of global electricity production. Should they be unable to provide the necessary power due to increased water shortages, economic collapse may not be far behind.
Well, turns out that wind energy is almost water-free! US Department of Energy estimates that 20% of wind power in the US power system by 2030 would save as much as 4 trillion gallons (15 trillion litres) of water. More reason to pursue wind?
And, to mitigate climate change, the power sector not only needs to become CO2 free, but also reduce its water consumption.
Thermal power systems are based upon what is known as the Rankin cycle. Often, steam is used to power turbines, but then it must be cooled to become liquid. Coal, Nuclear, or even solar power could be used to heat the steam, but tremendous amounts of water are usually required for cooling. In many places, that water is in very short supply or essential for our domestic water needs and agriculture. A shortage of water would require such power stations operate at less than full capacity.
Conventional fossil fuel and nuclear power plants make up 78% of global electricity production. Should they be unable to provide the necessary power due to increased water shortages, economic collapse may not be far behind.
Well, turns out that wind energy is almost water-free! US Department of Energy estimates that 20% of wind power in the US power system by 2030 would save as much as 4 trillion gallons (15 trillion litres) of water. More reason to pursue wind?
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Cut the waste
Here is some revealing info: 1 ream of paper = 6% of a tree! = 5.4 kg of Co2 in the atmosphere! And 3 sheets of A4 paper = 1 lit.of water!
So should you think twice before you take the print out which will never be read anyway?! Yes. Why do offices insist on a hard copy, even if it never will be read? Why do we encourage the plastic cup culture at our functions?
There are so many ways we can cut the waste. For instance, think of all the painting competitions held in the nation. One organisation alone is said to have used more than 1 Crore equivalent A1 size papers during painting competitions conducted by it last year!
Not to say we ban such competitions, but maybe we need to think if they are serving the purpose. Do children who paint on global issues go away any more enlightened, or is it merely yet another tool to propogate competition?
Can we think innovatively? Instead of painting on environment themes, why not make children build things from waste? To celebrate Earth day, why not get them to take up a campaign instead of spending paper, paint?
Agree?
So should you think twice before you take the print out which will never be read anyway?! Yes. Why do offices insist on a hard copy, even if it never will be read? Why do we encourage the plastic cup culture at our functions?
There are so many ways we can cut the waste. For instance, think of all the painting competitions held in the nation. One organisation alone is said to have used more than 1 Crore equivalent A1 size papers during painting competitions conducted by it last year!
Not to say we ban such competitions, but maybe we need to think if they are serving the purpose. Do children who paint on global issues go away any more enlightened, or is it merely yet another tool to propogate competition?
Can we think innovatively? Instead of painting on environment themes, why not make children build things from waste? To celebrate Earth day, why not get them to take up a campaign instead of spending paper, paint?
Agree?
Monday, August 1, 2011
Access more important
When energy is being discussed, it is either security or mix that is discussed, not the energy access, or energy poverty. Is it because the poor have no voice?
Indoor smoke inhalation kills more people ever year (around 1.4 million people) than malaria does. Also, while the mortality incidence from AIDS and malaria are projected to decrease in coming years, deaths from indoor smoke inhalation are expected to rise.
If the aim is to improve access, decentralised power must play a large role, one in which communities have a stake. Yet, when it comes to research, it is most always the advanced combustion systems, or commercial fuels, and large centralized power facilities that are discussed. This, even though more than 3 billion people rely on wood, charcoal, and other biomass fuels for the bulk of their energy needs.
Do we need as much "cutting edge" research as socially relevant solutions? Or what experts refer to as mundane science.
Driving down the cost of clean energy, so that industrial nations can replace their incumbent carbon infrastructure with renewables, is inextricably linked to closing the global energy gap and expanding energy access to the world's poor, as many see it. Delivering the energy poor the means to control their own destiny through expanded access to clean and affordable electricity must be an explicit element in efforts towards decarbonization. Do you agree?
Access must be an integral part of security.
Indoor smoke inhalation kills more people ever year (around 1.4 million people) than malaria does. Also, while the mortality incidence from AIDS and malaria are projected to decrease in coming years, deaths from indoor smoke inhalation are expected to rise.
If the aim is to improve access, decentralised power must play a large role, one in which communities have a stake. Yet, when it comes to research, it is most always the advanced combustion systems, or commercial fuels, and large centralized power facilities that are discussed. This, even though more than 3 billion people rely on wood, charcoal, and other biomass fuels for the bulk of their energy needs.
Do we need as much "cutting edge" research as socially relevant solutions? Or what experts refer to as mundane science.
Driving down the cost of clean energy, so that industrial nations can replace their incumbent carbon infrastructure with renewables, is inextricably linked to closing the global energy gap and expanding energy access to the world's poor, as many see it. Delivering the energy poor the means to control their own destiny through expanded access to clean and affordable electricity must be an explicit element in efforts towards decarbonization. Do you agree?
Access must be an integral part of security.
UK energy consumption shows no dip
The UK Department of Energy and Climate Change’s digest of energy statistics published recently reveals little progress on curbing energy consumption or increasing renewables.
According to the Digest of UK Energy Statistics 2011 (or DUKES as it is known), although UK energy production fell by 5.3% in 2010, primary consumption rose by 3.2%. However, adjusting for the particularly cold winter puts consumption on an even keel, just 0.4% down on 2009. Consequently, the UK continues to be a net importer of energy, with a dependency level of 28%.
Last year also saw a large increase in imports of liquefied natural gas, up to a third of total gas imports. Gas now accounts for 47% of electricity supplied in the UK, while coal makes up 28% and nuclear power 16%. Coal consumption also rose by 5.2%, driven mainly by a 4.4% increase in consumption by major power producers.
Renewables, meanwhile, make up a mere 6.8% of total UK electricity generation up just 0.1% on 2009 despite a 42% increase in offshore wind capacity, a 16% increase in onshore wind capacity and a 9% increase in biomass and waste-to-energy.
As measured by the EU Renewables Directive, renewables account for just 3.3% of energy consumption, up 0.3% on 2009 and still well off the target for the UK of 15% by 2020.
Meanwhile, the UK Government appears to be taking a cautious approach to shale gas. Although the practice of hydraulic fracturing or fracking used to extract shale gas has been widely criticised by environmentalists in the US and led to a moratorium in France, the climate change committee had said that the chances of aquifer contamination in the UK were small. But the government has downplayed the shale prospects. Government indicated it did notbelieve that security of supply considerations will be the main driver of policy in relation to the exploitation of shale gas in the UK.
According to the Digest of UK Energy Statistics 2011 (or DUKES as it is known), although UK energy production fell by 5.3% in 2010, primary consumption rose by 3.2%. However, adjusting for the particularly cold winter puts consumption on an even keel, just 0.4% down on 2009. Consequently, the UK continues to be a net importer of energy, with a dependency level of 28%.
Last year also saw a large increase in imports of liquefied natural gas, up to a third of total gas imports. Gas now accounts for 47% of electricity supplied in the UK, while coal makes up 28% and nuclear power 16%. Coal consumption also rose by 5.2%, driven mainly by a 4.4% increase in consumption by major power producers.
Renewables, meanwhile, make up a mere 6.8% of total UK electricity generation up just 0.1% on 2009 despite a 42% increase in offshore wind capacity, a 16% increase in onshore wind capacity and a 9% increase in biomass and waste-to-energy.
As measured by the EU Renewables Directive, renewables account for just 3.3% of energy consumption, up 0.3% on 2009 and still well off the target for the UK of 15% by 2020.
Meanwhile, the UK Government appears to be taking a cautious approach to shale gas. Although the practice of hydraulic fracturing or fracking used to extract shale gas has been widely criticised by environmentalists in the US and led to a moratorium in France, the climate change committee had said that the chances of aquifer contamination in the UK were small. But the government has downplayed the shale prospects. Government indicated it did notbelieve that security of supply considerations will be the main driver of policy in relation to the exploitation of shale gas in the UK.
Monday, July 25, 2011
More with less
Is a low-carbon necessarily a low-energy future?
Given the intermittency issue of solar and wind, and the huge investments needed for storage and long distance transmission, low-carbon path requires a high rate of growth in that expensive sector, and therefore high rates of investment. Governments would have to jump-start the transition with big subsidies—a tough order!
Global coal production will max out in the next few years and start to decline. And then there is China which now burns almost half the world’s total and is starting to import enormous quantities, driving up prices worldwide. Costs of production of natural gas and per-well depletion rates also are high.
Of course, even if one were to continue on the high carbon track, things are bound to grind to a halt soon. Enormous amounts of coal, oil, gas, and other fossil fuels still remain underground, but each new increment will cost significantly more to extract (in terms of both money and energy). Most of what is left is lower quality, expensive-to-produce, less accessible resources.
After a certain point, even if gross energy production is still climbing, the amount of energy actually useful to society starts to decline anyway. From then on, it is impossible to increase the amount of useful energy available. Whatever the path, we have less energy to use.
As more energy observers concur, energy conservation must be brought from the background to centrestage. This covers not only efficient use of energy which releases more energy for other uses, it should also look at discouraging extravagance. For many of our daily requirements, this means a re-look at new (or old) ways to do things.
Surprisingly, in releasing so much energy from our menu, we could find ourselves living healthier lives than before.
A low energy future is the sane choice. Agree?
Given the intermittency issue of solar and wind, and the huge investments needed for storage and long distance transmission, low-carbon path requires a high rate of growth in that expensive sector, and therefore high rates of investment. Governments would have to jump-start the transition with big subsidies—a tough order!
Global coal production will max out in the next few years and start to decline. And then there is China which now burns almost half the world’s total and is starting to import enormous quantities, driving up prices worldwide. Costs of production of natural gas and per-well depletion rates also are high.
Of course, even if one were to continue on the high carbon track, things are bound to grind to a halt soon. Enormous amounts of coal, oil, gas, and other fossil fuels still remain underground, but each new increment will cost significantly more to extract (in terms of both money and energy). Most of what is left is lower quality, expensive-to-produce, less accessible resources.
After a certain point, even if gross energy production is still climbing, the amount of energy actually useful to society starts to decline anyway. From then on, it is impossible to increase the amount of useful energy available. Whatever the path, we have less energy to use.
As more energy observers concur, energy conservation must be brought from the background to centrestage. This covers not only efficient use of energy which releases more energy for other uses, it should also look at discouraging extravagance. For many of our daily requirements, this means a re-look at new (or old) ways to do things.
Surprisingly, in releasing so much energy from our menu, we could find ourselves living healthier lives than before.
A low energy future is the sane choice. Agree?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
