Britain sets 5-year plan to spur solar, biomass energy

[Graeme]

Britain sets 5-year plan to spur solar, biomass energy

Britain set out a 5-year plan on Tuesday to unlock the solar and biomass investment needed to achieve the country's 2020 green energy targets.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) sought to give investors the certainty they need to build new solar and biomass power plants by deciding subsidy levels over the 2013-2017 period.

Support levels for the solar photovoltaic (PV) industry, while higher than initial proposals made by the government in September, will be cut by 20 percent from current levels starting in April 2013, when the new scheme takes effect.

The government won praise from developers of biomass projects who welcomed its decision to relax its original plan to cap subsidies once dedicated capacity exceeded 400 megawatts (MW).

The government expects the move to mobilise at least 600 million pounds ($975 million) in biomass projects - burning material like straw and sawdust to generate power - while one developer said it could unlock billions of pounds of new investment

Britain's subsidies are aimed at helping it meet targets to derive 15 percent of its energy demand from renewable sources by 2020 and reduce carbon output.

reuters

[pstarr]

Britain imports 40% of the total food consumed and the proportion is rising. If Britain diverts agriculture (timber is agriculture) to fuel then it must import more agriculture. If Britain imports biomass to make fuel, then it will use said fuel to power said import. Sounds like a lose-lose. Or is that a lose-lose-lose-lose?

[Graeme]

From the DECC website:

SOURCES OF BIOMASS

There are a wide variety of biomass sources in the UK. Imports will also play a part. Biomass used for heat and power is generally derived from the following:

virgin wood from the conventional management of trees. This includes thinning, felling and coppicing of sustainably managed forests, parks and urban trees;

wood residues from sawmills and other wood processing industries;

agricultural energy crops such as short rotation coppice (SRC), or miscanthus (a tall, woody grass) which may be grown on land unsuitable for food crops;

agricultural residues such as straw, husks and kernels;

wet waste including sewage sludge, animal manure and food waste that would otherwise be disposed of in landfill.

organic biodegradable proportion of municipal solid waste, commercial and industrial waste, and construction and demolition waste.

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS?

Bio-energy has a wide range of benefits, including:

helping to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions;

providing very cost-effective energy, relative to other renewables technologies;

providing a controllable energy supply, so balancing intermittent technologies such as wind and solar;

reducing our reliance on imports of fossil fuels, giving us a more secure energy supply. This also helps reduce the impact of changes in global oil & gas supplies and their spot prices;

creating green jobs across the fuel supply chain, particularly in rural areas.

HOW DOES BIOENERGY REDUCE CARBON EMISSIONS?

Carbon is absorbed from the atmosphere during the growth of the plant. When used as a fuel, the carbon is released back into the atmosphere. By comparison, the use of fossil fuels such as oil and coal releases carbon captured millions of years ago and so adds to the overall carbon emissions to the atmosphere.

The carbon savings from biomass can vary widely because the savings are offset by the fossil energy that is used for cultivation (such as fertilisers), harvesting, processing and transportation. Major land use change, particularly deforestation and draining of peat bogs, can completely negate the carbon saving, as well as cause damage to biodiversity and other ecosystem resources. It is therefore critical that biomass resources are grown sustainably.

[dorlomin]

Britain imports 40% of the total food consumed and the proportion is rising. If Britain diverts agriculture (timber is agriculture) to fuel then it must import more agriculture. If Britain imports biomass to make fuel, then it will use said fuel to power said import. Sounds like a lose-lose. Or is that a lose-lose-lose-lose?

Significant portions of formerly agricultural land are given over to recreational uses such as hunting. Other land is to hilly to farm profitably in a mechanised world where UK labour costs are high and the pound strong. Since the early 1800s it has been more profitable to employ UK labour to manufacturing and other services and import cheaper foods from other countries. The abolition of the corn laws were a deliberate signal that labour was more valuable in factories.

Much of the old land is very suitable to forestry. That can be done more economically on the steep hill sides than grain farming.

[dorlomin]

Support levels for the solar photovoltaic (PV) industry, while higher than initial proposals made by the government in September, will be cut by 20 percent from current levels starting in April 2013, when the new scheme takes effect.

PV is in freefall due to the cuts in feed in tarrifs. The tories are going all guns blazing for a new dash for gas.

The gas is in the densely populated NW of England, where traffic is at capacity on many roads. The huge additional traffic required for shale in many of these areas will create massive public anger, choke points in villages that are already difficult to get through.

This new energy bill is just greenwashing for the shale gas industry.

[Plantagenet]

....Cuadrilla Resources, the UK's most established fracking operator, that its exploration licence for the shale hotspot around Blackpool contained 200 trillion cubic feet of gas – the equivalent to 70 years of UK consumption.
---from The Independent

----------------

Some folks think there is a lot of NG in Britain. Given the long history of coal production, and the significant North Sea oil finds off Scotland, the potential for additional hydrocarbons in the form of NG from shale gas could indeed be pretty large there.

Location of Shale and NG leases in Britain

[pstarr]

....Cuadrilla Resources, the UK's most established fracking operator, that its exploration licence for the shale hotspot around Blackpool contained 200 trillion cubic feet of gas – the equivalent to 70 years of UK consumption.
---from The Independent

----------------

Some folks think there is a lot of NG in Britain. Given the long history of coal production, and the significant North Sea oil finds off Scotland, the potential for additional hydrocarbons in the form of NG from shale gas could indeed be pretty large there.

Location of Shale and NG leases in Britain

I thoughts Trolls were wiped out of Great Britain during the First Age.

[pstarr]

Much of the old land is very suitable to forestry. That can be done more economically on the steep hill sides than grain farming.

Tree growth is just as dependent on good soil, surface water, and abundant nutrients as are other agricultural crops. Steep hills may appear green in time, but do not recover from resource extraction. Stressed forests become prey to insect/viral problems.

[Plantagenet]

....Cuadrilla Resources, the UK's most established fracking operator, that its exploration licence for the shale hotspot around Blackpool contained 200 trillion cubic feet of gas – the equivalent to 70 years of UK consumption.
---from The Independent

----------------

Some folks think there is a lot of NG in Britain. Given the long history of coal production, and the significant North Sea oil finds off Scotland, the potential for additional hydrocarbons in the form of NG from shale gas could indeed be pretty large there.

Location of Shale and NG leases in Britain

I thoughts Trolls were wiped out of Great Britain during the First Age.

"When someone of little or no intelligence on the internet gets into a discussion, debate, or argument that they cannot keep up with because of their inability to think and process information outside of their closed little mind, and respond by calling the other person more intelligent than them (A TROLL)! This act is therefore TROLLING because it's a cop out to an intelligent conversation by which the one more intelligent is falsely accused of being a troll as a trolling diversion tactic ... done by stupid trolls."

[pstarr]

The topic is biomass, i.e. wood, not natural gas or Obama.

Perhaps Sauron has stolen your mind into his inky depths?

[Plantagenet]

The topic is biomass, i.e. wood, not natural gas....

If you had actually read the posts in this topic, you'd know that several posters have discussed the British plans for solar and biomass in the context of British plans for NG, because all of these are currently competing for government backing in Britain.

[pstarr]

The topic is biomass, i.e. wood, not natural gas....

If you had actually read the posts in this topic, you'd know that several posters have discussed the British plans for solar and biomass in the context of British plans for NG, because all of these are currently competing for government backing in Britain.

How's your CNG conversion?

[Plantagenet]

How's your CNG conversion?

You sure make up a lot of stuff. I don't have a CNG conversion---never have and never will.

-------------------------------------------

Rather than building new biomass powerplants, British power companies are converting existing coal-fired plants to wood-fired.

plans for new biomass plants shelved in UK

As a result claims that biomass plants will create hundreds of new jobs are questionable, as the new jobs at the biomass powerplants often turn out to be the same as the old jobs at the coal-fired plants

[Tanada]

I dunno, once way back in the 1950's it was predicted that we would shift to Natural Gas as a cleaner alternative to oil the same way we shifted to oil because it was more convenient than coal. Back then most ships were steam ships and they burned heavy oil, Bunker C bunker D or basically as close to asphalt as you could get and not have to heat it to pump it. The stuff put out almost as much particulate pollution as coal did before the clean air act started forcing change.

Now most ships are motor vessels or gas turbine vessels and burn a much more refined grade of fuel. We also are in the process of eliminating the old filthy coal plants that were grandfathered in the clean air act at long last. A lot of those are being replaced with Gas Turbines burning natural gas either in a single cycle peaking plant or in a combined cycle baseload plant. Even the baseload plants are able to kick on rapidly for the first part of the cycle generating about 60% of full capacity with just the gas turbine running. Not sure how long it takes for them to build up steam pressure to run the second cycle but I don't imagine it would take more than an hour, the plants are designed by competent engineers.

With the flood of tight gas hitting the market the price of gas will be low compared to oil for the foreseeable future, especially as peak oil starts to bite. The problem is as the price differential grows the cost benefit analysis will favor converting over and the demand for gas will grow rapidly. At some point we hit the limit to how fast we can drill and how rapidly we will use up the tight gas. Once we hit that point the price will start creeping up until we hit break even for Geo-pressured gas in deeper formations. Lather/Rinse/Repeat

I used to think Peak Oil would slow or stop Global Warming. I no longer have that optimism.

[pstarr]

With the flood of tight gas hitting the market the price of gas will be low compared to oil for the foreseeable future, especially as peak oil starts to bite. The problem is as the price differential grows the cost benefit analysis will favor converting over and the demand for gas will grow rapidly. At some point we hit the limit to how fast we can drill and how rapidly we will use up the tight gas. Once we hit that point the price will start creeping up until we hit break even for Geo-pressured gas in deeper formations. Lather/Rinse/Repeat

I used to think Peak Oil would slow or stop Global Warming. I no longer have that optimism.

I wouldn't give up hope just yet. Don't forget that geo-pressured natural gas was in decline before the recent tight-structure (shale/carbonate) boom. I wouldn't expect those prices to maintain.

Also there is little or no evidence that the current unusual low price for tight-structure natural gas (or expected low prices for tight-structure oil) is sustainable. I'm pretty sure natural-gas prices will show exponential increases as both cash-flow and new investment money dries up. Don't forget that tight-structure-production depends on the constant infill drilling and reservoir extension. Once the remaining sweet spots are wrung dry, and the easy money skedaddles, then productions declines will surprise everyone with their straight-line hyperbolic dive.

Our great-great-grandparents burned wood and coal. Our grandparents burned oil. We burn natural gas. Our children will burn their furniture.

[Plantagenet]

With the flood of tight gas hitting the market the price of gas will be low compared to oil for the foreseeable future, especially as peak oil starts to bite.....I used to think Peak Oil would slow or stop Global Warming. I no longer have that optimism.

Yup.

Its interesting to think that converting from oil to NG might help reduce CO2 emissions in the EU and the USA, but it sure isn't going to completely stop CO2 emissions or reduce the 400 ppm CO2 that is already in the atmosphere.

And the real driver of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere now is ever growing CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants in Chindia. Peak Oil and higher energy prices for gasoline and NG are likely to further increase the use of coal---not decrease it.

[pstarr]

With the flood of tight gas hitting the market the price of gas will be low compared to oil for the foreseeable future, especially as peak oil starts to bite.....I used to think Peak Oil would slow or stop Global Warming. I no longer have that optimism.

Yup.

Its interesting to think that converting from oil to NG might help reduce CO2 emissions

So how is that natural gas conversion? When again are you going to fuel with natural gas?

[Plantagenet]

When again are you going to fuel with natural gas?

Your question doesn't make sense---Do you mean "what [again] are you going to fuel with natural gas?"

I pointed out in this thread above that Britain is talking about converting coal-fired electrical power plants to biomass (wood-fired) and/or NG---as far as NG goes, lots of these kinds of conversions of coal-fired to NG electric power has been going on in the USA for several years now.

There are also 40 different models of NG powered cars and trucks in the EU. The UK is laggin a bit behind the rest of the EU due to its right-hand drive sub-market, but sue of NG vehicles are like to grow in the UK as well
NG cars making a comeback

[pstarr]

With the flood of tight gas hitting the market the price of gas will be low compared to oil for the foreseeable future, especially as peak oil starts to bite.....I used to think Peak Oil would slow or stop Global Warming. I no longer have that optimism.

Yup.

Its interesting to think that converting from oil to NG might help reduce CO2 emissions in the EU and the USA, but it sure isn't going to completely stop CO2 emissions or reduce the 400 ppm CO2 that is already in the atmosphere.

And the real driver of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere now is ever growing CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants in Chindia. Peak Oil and higher energy prices for gasoline and NG are likely to further increase the use of coal---not decrease it.

This makes no sense. Given the abundance of tight shale natural gas and the ready conversion of automobile ICE's, won't we see a further decrease in the use of coal? I understand that China has an abundance of tight-shale natural gas. So they will reduce coal use and vindicate Obama's commitment to reducing CO2 emissions. The Repubs lose again.