Global climate change, for which the change in Arctic sea ice is
evidence as an example, is motivating power utilities, car
manufacturers, oil companies and others to look at alternative sources
of energy. Various terms are used to describe these alternatives such
as non-emitting, clean, sustainable, renewable, and green.
Renewables
Renewable energy is energy from natural resources such as solar, wind, water, biofuel, and geothermal. An excellent article in Wikipedia gives a current overview of alternative renewable energy
sources. Each of these energy sources has pros and cons.
Some of them are emitting. They create greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. For
example, biofuels often require energy and generate GHG to manufacture them, such as
ethanol. I blogged about cellulosic and sugar cane alcohol which are believed to reduce emissions compared to gasoline, but one study suggested that corn ethanol is worse for air quality than gasoline . Other renewables generate GHG in the process of being converted to
usable energy, such as biomass. For some of these biofuels it is hoped
that as technology improves the net carbon balance (Burning biomass creates CO2, but growing it removes CO2 from the atmosphere) will approach zero.
Another
challenge wih some biofuels, such as palm oil, is that using them as a
fuel competes with human consumption as food which tends to make an important
food source more expensive.
In some regions of the world, some
renewables are not considered to be green or clean because of negative
impacts either on the environment or humans, for example, large scale
hydroelectric projects in California and other parts of the world. The
best known recent example is the Three Gorges Hydroelectric Project in
China.
Government Sponsorship
Government legislation is encouraging and requiring major investment in non-emitting energy sources. For example, the American Clean Energy and Security Act has been passed by the US House of Representatives. In Ontario the Green Energy and Green Economy Act was passed in May of this year. In addition stimulus packages around the world are directing funds toward alternative energy sources.
Financial Viability
Another important concern about alternative
sources of energy is the cost to the consumer either in
increased energy costs or in increased taxes. Althought a survey in the
US found that Americans are willing to pay more to reduce green house
gas emissions, many
people are concerned about an energy program based on government
subsidies, preferring open market programs such as carbon
cap and trade.
Some renewable technologies are financially expensive compared to traditional energy sources. For example, in Ottawa there are plans
to develop a $100 million solar farm in West Carleton. Critics charge
that the cost in government subsidies amounts to 42 cents/kWh compared
to 4 to 8 cents/kWh that consumers in Ontario are paying for electric power from conventional energy sources.
You might remember a number of years ago being surprised to see very green oil
company advertisements. BP (was British Petroleum) was the one I
remember in particular. This signaled a sigificant investment in alternative energy
sources including solar, wind, and carbon sequestration by major oil
companies. Recently
the investment in non-carbon fuels by Big Oil appears to be decreasing,
although there are exceptions, for example, Exxon Mobile recently announced a $600 million investment to develop algal fuel.
There
also seems to be less interest in carbon capture and storage (CCS)
which is now seen as only viable with major government subsidies.
Conventional Electric Power Grid
One fhe important concerns with renewables such as wind and solar is
that in most parts of the world the existing electric power grid was
designed for conventional energy sources, which supports an on demand model where power is
consumed immediately when it is generated. Conventional energy sources
such as coal and oil fired plants generate power at centralized locations on demand, whereas wind and solar sources generate power, often in more remote locations, when the sun shines
and the wind blows, not necessarily when consumers require them. These types of power sources require a different type of power grid, typically with storage capability and a significant build out of transmission
lines to more remote locations where solar and wind farms are
being developed. I already blogged about the challenges of wind power
generation in China where it is estimated that 2.8 gigawatts of wind power cannot be delivered to consumers because of the limitations of the power grid. It has been estimated that in the US implementing new energy sources and upgrading/replacing the existing grid (it is conceivable that we may have to replace much of the existing grid) will cost $1.5 to 2 trillion and will take years. As a result of the increased focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, for example as seen at the recent G8 meeting in Italy, people in the utility industry are looking for alternative sources of energy that will lead to a reduction in GHG emissions in the short term. (Image Hydro One)
Nuclear
You may be surprised by the statistics on nuclear power around the world. Currently about 30 countries have operating nuclear power plants, and several countries are considering building their first nuclear plants. As of June 1, 2009 the total number of power plants worldwide is 436 working power plants, generating 2602 billion kWh, and supplying about 15% of the world’s electric power. Major countries generating most power from nuclear sources are US (19%), France (77%), Japan (35%), Russia (16%), Ukraine (47%), Germany (26%), South Korea (35%), Canada (15%), Sweden (46%), UK(15%), South Africa (5.5%), India (2.8%), and China (2%).
You also may be surprised to find that nuclear energy is back on the policy agendas of many countries. This is occurring for several reasons. First, increasing demand for energy. It is estimated that global population growth and industrial development will double electricity consumption by 2030. There will also be a need to renew a lot of generating plants in the US and the EU over the same period. In some parts of the world such as Australia an increasing shortage of fresh water requires energy-intensive desalination plants, and in the longer term new types of vehicles will require power sources for charging batteries or for hydrogen production.
Secondly, nuclear power does not generate GHG emissions and many people in the utility industry believe that nuclear power is the only feasible technology to meet the objectives of the new sustainable economy as well as the increasing demand for power coming from the rapid economic development occurring in the world’s most populous countries. A 2008 survey of power company executives in the US indicated that most of the respondents expect that nuclear power is to be the major source of non-emission generating power in the new green economy. “Utility industry personnel, as represented in our survey, still feel nuclear energy is the best way for the United States to deal with the impending threats, with 55%—compared with 50% last year—saying nuclear should have top priority. Continuing the survey trend from past years, utility personnel believe strongly that nuclear energy is the best investment to meet environmental requirements. Nuclear demonstrated not only the highest level of support this year (77% of all respondents and 80% of all IOUs), but also a sustained increase in the level of support over the three years of the survey. Wind and solar rank second and third as preferred technologies: 56% and 54%, respectively. Wind has retained its relative ranking over the 2006 to 2008 period, while interest in solar has accelerated rapidly. While not at significant levels, interest in tidal resources has also increased substantially over the last three years. Interest in coal gasification has lost ground, dropping from 22% in 2006 to approximately10% in 2008.”
Thirdly, increasing fossil fuel prices have improved the economics of nuclear power for electricity. In addition, carbon emission reductions which are encouraged through various forms of government incentives and trading schemes, increase the economic attractiveness of nuclear power.
Fourthly, an important topic in many parts of the world, especially recently in the US, is security of supply.
And finally, nuclear power generation can be implemented without replacing the existing power grid.
Since Three-Mile Island and Chernobyl, the risks associated with nuclear power generation have become well known. In the US no new nuclear power plants have been built for 20 years. GreenPeace and others have been very active in trying to stop the development of new power plants and to shut down existing.power plants. Germany's official policy is to not build new nuclear plants and to decommision existing plants at the end of their lifetime, although there are signs that popular attitude to nuclear power is changing. According to recent surveys by the Bielefeld-based Emnid Institute for both the Deutsches Atomforum and Greenpeace Germany, 48% of Germans favour extending the lifetimes of Germany's nuclear power plants, compared to 40% two years ago.
But because of the requirement to reduce GHG emissions and satisfy increasing demand for power, the number of nuclear power plants is expected to double in the near future. As of June 2009, 45 new plants are under construction, 131 are planned, and 282 are proposed.
Advanced Design and Simulation Tools
According to the heads of the US Department of Energy’s national labs, meeting the US’s increasing energy demand while limiting greenhouse gas emissions requires revitalizing nuclear power in the US including (1) making maximum use of the current operating light-water reactors, using plant life extensions, extended fuel burnup, and power uprates and (2) immediately beginning a program to deploy advanced light-water reactors. They argue that design, modeling and simulation technologies have made tremendous advances since the existing plants were built and that if the next-generation facilities are designed and built using state-of-the-art design, engineering, testing and diagnostics tools, nuclear power is a safe, financially viable option for sustainable power generation especially compared to an alternative of more coal fired plants and increasing GHG emissions. (Image James Brown Rumic)
Subscribe