Renew Economy 13th June 2017, Wind, solar and energy efficiency have replaced the vast majority of power
previously provided by the UK’s coal fleet, a new analysis shows.
Since the start of the coalition government in 2010, coal’s role in the
generation mix has fallen to historic lows, culminating in the country’s
first coal-free day since the 19th century earlier this year.
But the gap has not been plugged by natural gas, the UK’s now primary source of
electricity. Renewables and energy efficiency have together covered nearly
85% of the power the UK no longer gets from its coal plants. http://reneweconomy.com.au/wind-solar-energy-efficiency-replaces-coal-generation-uk-33657/
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
renewable, UK |
Leave a comment
Deutsche Welle 12th June 2017, Japan’s nuclear energy sector is riven by poor management, is overly
bureaucratic and staffed by people who no longer have any pride in their
jobs. So accidents are inevitable, say critics.
The Japan Atomic Energy Agency (JAEA) issued a statement on Saturday, June 10, claiming that none
of the five workers at a nuclear research facility that it had previously
reported had suffered serious internal radiation exposure after an accident
on June 7 have plutonium in their lungs.
The agency’s report contradicts the initial claim that one of the workers had suffered internal exposure to
22,000 Becquerels of plutonium after a canister that had been in a storage
unit at the Oarai Research and Development Center for 26 years was opened
and bags holding the material burst.
Japan’s Asahi Shimbun newspaper has described the JAEA as “an organization that has been accused of gross
bungling in the past” and said the confusion over the workers’ exposure was
caused by high levels of plutonium on the men’s skin, not in their lungs.
“It’s just another example of poor management in these organizations,” said
Aileen Mioko Smith, an anti-nuclear campaigner with Kyoto-based Green
Action Japan, an NGO.
“I think these organizations have become overly
bureaucratic, there is no longer any pride among the workforce in what they
are doing – either at these sites or in management – and far too much work
is subcontracted out because that is the easiest way for them to save
money,” she told DW. http://www.dw.com/en/japans-nuclear-mishap-underlines-industry-malaise/a-39209569
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
business and costs, Japan |
Leave a comment
Big switch: Distributed energy to overtake centralised power by 2018 http://reneweconomy.com.au/big-switch-distributed-energy-to-overtake-centralised-power-by-2018-2018/ By Giles Parkinson on 13 June 2017 [good graphs]
Energy storage has reached a tipping point, so much so that around 320GW of new large scale power plants that might have been planned in the 10 years to 2023 will now no longer be needed.
According to a new report from Deutsche Bank, the growth of distributed energy – locally provided renewables such as rooftop solar and battery storage – will soon outstrip new centralised generation capacity additions across the world.
In fact, it could happen as early as 2018, marking a fundamental shift in the nature of the world’s energy systems, recognising that the old centralised model will be quickly replaced by a system based around localised energy production and storage.
Deutsche Bank estimates that the market for stationary energy storage – used in electricity grids – will rise six fold in the next five years, from 1GW and $4 billion, or 40GW or $25 billion by 2022. Note the big fall in spending per GW as the price of storage plunges.
“This increased penetration of distributed generation should drive the need for intelligent distribution networks comprised of nanogrids, microgrids and virtual power plants (VPPs),” the Deutsche analysts write.
To put the 320GW into context, it is more than six times the installed capacity in Australia’s electricity grid, and about 14 times the size of its coal fleet. It represents the once-anticipated new build of coal fired power stations in India, that many say will no longer happen.
The shift in emphasis from centralised to distributed energy has long been predicted, although it is given scant attention in the latest Finkel Review. Some analysis, such as that by the CSIRO, predict that half of all generation will come from consumers by 2050.
Deutsche Bank says the global shift is likely to be accelerated by moves to reduce the scope of solar feed in tariffs, encouraging yet more consumers to add battery storage.
“Regulatory environment will likely be a critical driver of storage adoption rates and contrary to consensus views, detrimental solar policies could potentially act as a significant growth catalyst for storage sector.” (Meaning low feed in tariffs will encourage more people into storage).
It notes that in several European countries, the difference in the price of feed-in-tariffs and price paid for electricity from the price of power consumed from the grid is significantly wide. It didn’t mention Australia, but that is also significant difference.
This shift is being accompanied by big cost reductions in battery storage, particularly in the cost of lithium ion cells.
It lithium-ion cell costs have already plunged from $US900/kWh in 2010 to $US225/kWh in 2015 – a similar trajectory to solar, and are tipped to fall to $US150/kWh by 2020. Tesla/Panasonic li-ion costs are already below $US200/kWh for cells and around $US225/kWh for the entire battery pack.
In says that in California, for example, combining a solar-panel system with a commercial-scale battery installation (500kWh) can deliver a 20 per cent return on investment with state subsidies, and still 12 per cent without subsidies, from peak shifting alone.
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
2 WORLD, decentralised |
Leave a comment
FT 13th June 2017 Oliver Joy, Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy,
Brussels: I read with interest the report on power-generating pavements in London. The US pulling out of the Paris deal is a storm in a teacup in this context. The real answer to the global energy transition and delivering
beyond the pledges made in Paris lies with our cities and mayors.
Cities consume more than two-thirds of the world’s energy and account for more than 70 per cent of emissions globally. Mayors and local leaders are truly at the “coal face” of the climate challenge. But without electrification of sectors such as heating, cooling and transport, the problem will never be solved.
Mitigation and adaptation measures are important, but energy transition is where the climate battle will be won or lost. Electrifying these sectors will not only reduce emissions but also open cities up as new centres of energy demand. In turn, this will mean that more renewables can come online.
Currently, wind and solar plants are being switched off to ensure system stability. But what if that excess power could be sent to our cities instead, so that millions of people can charge their cars with cheap kilowatts rather than petrol? This will mean rolling out more transmission capacity and smart grids so that power generated by wind and solar in remote regions can be delivered to the densely populated urban areas.
It will also mean consumers thinking consciously about their consumption patterns and when to boil their kettles. On June 27, Maros Sefcovic, European Commission vice-president for energy union, Michael Bloomberg and
Christiana Figueres will meet in Brussels with nine local leaders at the first board meeting of the newly formed Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate and Energy.
The initiative is an alliance of more than 7,400 cities and local governments worldwide on climate action. One thing is for
sure, if we don’t open up and electrify our cities, it will be like driving the global energy transition with the handbrake on.
https://www.ft.com/content/88852f90-4d3d-11e7-919a-1e14ce4af89b
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
2 WORLD, climate change, ENERGY |
Leave a comment
Climate News Network 12th June 2017 Imagine living in a house which heats and cools itself, which saves
significantly on energy costs and keeps you healthy and comfortable – and
helps to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the process.
The good news is that, in the UK and several other countries, you don’t need to imagine
it. Houses as good as that are available to those who can afford them,
thanks in large measure to the Passivhaus Trust, an independent non-profit
organisation which promotes the principles of low-energy design.
“If youwant to get to zero carbon, Passivhaus gets you most of the way there, and
a bit of renewable energy finishes the job”, says Jon Bootland, the
Trust’s CEO. The Trust is one of the winners in this year’s Ashden
Awards, an annual international competition to encourage sustainable
energy. Passivhaus topped the shortlist for the 2017 award for sustainable
buildings.
The awards will be presented on 15 June by Al Gore, the former
US vice-president turned climate campaigner, at a ceremony at the Royal
Geographical Society in London, with each UK winner receiving £10,000
(US$13,300) to support their business (overseas winners receive twice as
much). http://climatenewsnetwork.net/passive-housing-cuts-costs-global-warming/
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
2 WORLD, ENERGY |
Leave a comment
Union of Concerned Scientists DAVE LOCHBAUM, DIRECTOR, NUCLEAR SAFETY PROJECT | JUNE 13, 2017, The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station near Forked River, New Jersey is the oldest nuclear power plant operating in the United States. It began operating in 1969 around the time Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were hiking the lunar landscape.
Oyster Creek has a boiling water reactor (BWR) with a Mark I containment design, similar to the Unit 1 reactor at Fukushima Daiichi. Water entering the reactor vessel is heated to the boiling point by the energy released by the nuclear chain reaction within the core (see Figure 1). The steam flows through pipes from the reactor vessel to the turbines. The steam spins the turbines connected to the generator that produces electricity distributed by the offsite power grid. Steam discharged from the turbines flows into the condenser where it is cooled by water drawn from the Atlantic Ocean, or Barnegat Bay. The steam vapor is converted back into liquid form. Condensate and feedwater pumps supply the water collected in the condenser to the reactor vessel to repeat the cycle………
Bad Vibrations
In the early morning hours of November 20, 2016, the operators at Oyster Creek were conducting the quarterly test of the turbine control system. With the reactor at 95 percent power, the operator depressed a test pushbutton at 3:26 am per the procedure. The plant’s response was unexpected. The positions of the control valves and bypass valves began opening and closing small amounts causing the reactor pressure to fluctuate. Workers in the turbine building notified the control room operators that the linkages to the valves were vibrating. The operators began reducing the reactor power level in an attempt to stop the vibrations and pressure fluctuations.
The reactor automatically shut down at 3:42 pm from 92 percent power on high neutron flux in the reactor. Workers later found the linkage for control valve #2 had broken due to the vibrations and the linkage for control valve #4 had vibrated loose. The linkages are “mechanical arms” that enable the turbine control system to reposition the valves. The broken and loosened linkages impaired the ability of the control system to properly reposition the valves.
These mechanical malfunctions prevented the EHC system from properly controlling reactor pressure during the test and subsequent power reduction. The pressure inside the reactor vessel increased. In a BWR, reactor pressure increases collapse and shrink steam bubbles. Displacing steam void spaces with water increases the reactor power level. When atoms split to release energy, they also release neutrons. The neutrons can interact with other atoms to causing them to split. Water is much better than steam bubbles at slower down the neutrons to the range where the neutrons best interact with atoms. Put another way, the steam bubbles permit high energy neutrons to speed away from the fuel and get captured by non-fuel parts within the reactor vessel while the water better confines the neutrons to the fuel region.
The EHC system’s problem allowed the pressure inside the reactor vessel to increase. The higher pressure collapsed steam bubbles, increasing the reactor power level. As the reactor power level increased, more neutrons scurried about as more and more atoms split. The neutron monitoring system detected the increasing inventory of neutrons and initiated the automatic shut down of the reactor to avoid excessive power and fuel damage.
Workers attributed the vibrations to a design flaw. A component in the EHC system is specifically designed to dampen vibrations in the tubing providing hydraulic fluid to the linkages governing valve positions. But under certain conditions, depressing the test pushbutton creates a pressure pulse on that component. Instead of dampening the pressure piles, the component reacts in a way that causes the hydraulic system pressure to oscillate, creating the vibrations that damaged the linkages.
The component and damaged linkages were replaced. In addition, the test procedure was revised to avoid performing that specific portion of the test when the reactor is operating. In the future, that part of the turbine valve test will be performed during an outage.
Vibrations Re-Visited
It was not the first time that Oyster Creek was shut down due to problems performing this test. It wasn’t even the first time this decade…..http://allthingsnuclear.org/dlochbaum/oyster-creek-bad-vibrations
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, USA |
Leave a comment
Times Tribune, JOHN INTERVAL , 12 June Wth coal plants closing and nuclear power in serious trouble, natural gas has taken on increasing importance. Cheap and abundant gas has emerged as the Northeast’s No. 1 source of electricity.
Compared to coal and nuclear power, natural gas is a bargain. Natural gas-fired combined-cycle units are more cost-competitive than coal or nuclear power. The idea that natural gas will increasingly displace nuclear power in Pennsylvania is taken seriously.
A case in point: Owners of the Beaver Valley nuclear plant in Shippingport and Three Mile Island in Middletown have announced plans to retire both plants prematurely, unless the state government attaches a value to nuclear power’s role in carbon mitigation and power reliability. But Pennsylvania has rejected the idea of including nuclear power in its renewable electricity standard.
Whenever it finally happens, the tipping point from profitability to loss at Pennsylvania’s three other nuclear plants — Limerick, Peach Bottom and Susquehanna — will reverberate across the state, overhauling energy planning and placing greater emphasis on natural gas and renewable sources. When it happens, it will happen fast. Marcellus Shale offers an abundance of natural gas that goes beyond the dreams of energy planners.
The reality is that owners have either shut down or announced plans to shut down 14 U.S. nuclear plants since 2012, so actually relying on nuclear power for base-load electricity in the years ahead is all but impossible. Huge cost overruns and lengthy delays at the only nuclear plants under construction — two each in Georgia and South Carolina — are also a sign that nuclear power has a long road ahead before it can be relied on again.
The fate of any power plant should be determined by the electricity market, not by cutting deals that force consumers to bail out unprofitable facilities. In that regard, politicians in Illinois and New York State have approved as much as $10 billion in subsidies for five financially ailing nuclear plants, all owned by Exelon, a Chicago-based utility. Bloomberg Intelligence, a finance company, estimates that if every state with reactors in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic adopts subsidies at the same level as those in Illinois and New York state, ratepayers would have to shell out an additional $3.9 billion a year.
For decades, nuclear-generated electricity was competitive with coal and substantially cheaper than natural gas. But a combination of the shale revolution and higher nuclear costs changed the energy calculus. Gas prices declined, but the cost of maintaining and operating aging nuclear plants increased. When faced with the cost of replacing steam generators and other plant components, the owners of nuclear plants in Florida and California closed the facilities rather than shell out hundreds of millions of dollars for replacement parts.
While political interference in the energy market is precisely what we don’t need from government, making a switch to cheap natural gas will benefit consumers and put Pennsylvania in the driver’s seat for economic growth. Replacing aging nuclear plants with efficient gas units is what manufacturers of everything from computers to household appliances seek. Pennsylvania’s future is with natural gas.
…….Whenever it finally happens, the tipping point from profitability to loss at Pennsylvania’s three other nuclear plants — Limerick, Peach Bottom and Susquehanna — will reverberate across the state, overhauling energy planning and placing greater emphasis on natural gas and renewable sources. When it happens, it will happen fast. Marcellus Shale offers an abundance of natural gas that goes beyond the dreams of energy planners.
The reality is that owners have either shut down or announced plans to shut down 14 U.S. nuclear plants since 2012, so actually relying on nuclear power for base-load electricity in the years ahead is all but impossible. Huge cost overruns and lengthy delays at the only nuclear plants under construction — two each in Georgia and South Carolina — are also a sign that nuclear power has a long road ahead before it can be relied on again.
The fate of any power plant should be determined by the electricity market, not by cutting deals that force consumers to bail out unprofitable facilities. In that regard, politicians in Illinois and New York State have approved as much as $10 billion in subsidies for five financially ailing nuclear plants, all owned by Exelon, a Chicago-based utility. Bloomberg Intelligence, a finance company, estimates that if every state with reactors in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic adopts subsidies at the same level as those in Illinois and New York state, ratepayers would have to shell out an additional $3.9 billion a year……http://thetimes-tribune.com/opinion/no-subsidies-for-nuclear-po
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
general |
Leave a comment
Cornish Times 12th June 2017People in Saltash and Torpoint are being given important safety information on what to do in the event of a nuclear emergency at Devonport Dockyard. Homes and business that fall within the official public information zone are being sent a booklet which provides information about radiation, together with instructions to follow in the event of an accident. The booklets, which are updated once every three years to comply with Radiation
(Emergency Preparedness and Public Information) Regulations, tell thepublic what to do in ‘the very unlikely event’ that this happens. http://www.cornish-times.co.uk/article.cfm?id=110309
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
safety, UK |
Leave a comment
Emily Gosden, Energy Editor, The Times, June 13 2017 Vincent de Rivaz, who spearheaded the development of the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant, is to step down as EDF’s chief executive in Britain later this year.
June 14, 2017
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
general |
Leave a comment
nuclear-news 