Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
kristopher
kristopher's Journal
kristopher's Journal
May 22, 2012
More at: http://mainichi.jp/english/english/perspectives/news/20120521p2a00m0na020000c.html
Senior Japanese Journalist Reviews the Investigation of Fukushima
Japan cannot let material fears obscure danger of nuclear power
... for disaster prevention.
Last June, a report released by the Cabinet's Reconstruction Design Council in response to the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami warned of a return to rice bin worries -- economic over safety concerns -- after the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant. However, it must be said that "nuclear safety" itself is a dubious proposition.
One major news item last week was the hearings held by the Diet's nuclear disaster investigation committee. One of the issues raised was whether or not Fukushima plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) had requested government permission to abandon the power station after the hydrogen explosions at the No. 1 and 3 reactor buildings and the cooling failure at the No. 2 reactor. Banri Kaieda, minister of economy, trade and industry in those tense days in March 2011, stated that he did indeed receive a call asking permission to evacuate the plant. TEPCO Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, however, continues to insist that "this is not true."
The hearings were not the first time differences ...
What surprises the most is not the discrepancy itself, but that the truth about what actually happened at this turning point in the crisis -- when abandoning the plant may very well have meant evacuating all of eastern Japan -- remains obscured.
...
To put it succinctly, nothing about the disaster has been established concretely; not the cause, not the current conditions, not where the responsibility lies. Unlike the airplane crash investigation praised by Terada, there is no hope for new and reasoned plans to prevent a recurrence based on a firm understanding of the disaster's causes.
...
... for disaster prevention.
Last June, a report released by the Cabinet's Reconstruction Design Council in response to the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami warned of a return to rice bin worries -- economic over safety concerns -- after the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant. However, it must be said that "nuclear safety" itself is a dubious proposition.
One major news item last week was the hearings held by the Diet's nuclear disaster investigation committee. One of the issues raised was whether or not Fukushima plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) had requested government permission to abandon the power station after the hydrogen explosions at the No. 1 and 3 reactor buildings and the cooling failure at the No. 2 reactor. Banri Kaieda, minister of economy, trade and industry in those tense days in March 2011, stated that he did indeed receive a call asking permission to evacuate the plant. TEPCO Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata, however, continues to insist that "this is not true."
The hearings were not the first time differences ...
What surprises the most is not the discrepancy itself, but that the truth about what actually happened at this turning point in the crisis -- when abandoning the plant may very well have meant evacuating all of eastern Japan -- remains obscured.
...
To put it succinctly, nothing about the disaster has been established concretely; not the cause, not the current conditions, not where the responsibility lies. Unlike the airplane crash investigation praised by Terada, there is no hope for new and reasoned plans to prevent a recurrence based on a firm understanding of the disaster's causes.
...
More at: http://mainichi.jp/english/english/perspectives/news/20120521p2a00m0na020000c.html
May 22, 2012
Ramon Pichs, Co-Chair of the Working Group III, added:
Also speaking at the launch, Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC, said:
The report will feed into the broader work of the IPCC as it prepares its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). The AR5 Synthesis Report is scheduled for finalization in September 2014.
The SRREN, approved by government representatives from 194 nations, has reviewed the current penetration of six renewable energy technologies and their potential deployment over the coming decades.
The six renewable energy technologies reviewed are:
- Bioenergy, including energy crops; forest, agricultural and livestock residues and so called second generation biofuels
- Direct solar energy including photovoltaics and concentrating solar power
- Geothermal energy, based on heat extraction from the Earth‘s interior
- Hydropower, including run-of-river, in-stream or dam projects with reservoirs
- Ocean energy, ranging from barrages to ocean currents and ones which harness temperature
differences in the marine realm
- Wind energy, including on- and offshore systems
Over 160 existing scientific scenarios on the possible penetration of renewables by 2050, alongside environmental and social implications, have been reviewed with four analyzed in-depth. These four were chosen in order to represent the full range. Scenarios are used to explore possible future worlds, analyzing alternative pathways of socio-economic development and technological change.
The researchers have also studied the challenges linked to how renewable energy can be integrated into existing and future energy systems including electricity grids and likely cost benefits from these developments.
While the scenarios arrive at a range of estimates, the overall conclusions are that renewables will take an increasing slice of the energy market.
The most optimistic of the four, in-depth scenarios projects renewable energy accounting for as much as 77 percent of the world‘s energy demand by 2050, amounting to about 314 of 407 Exajoules per year. As a comparison, 314 Exajoules is over three times the annual energy supply in the United States in 2005 which is also a similar level of supply on the Continent of Europe according to various government and independent sources.
77 percent is up from just under 13 percent of the total primary energy supply of around 490 Exajoules in 2008. Each of the scenarios is underpinned by a range of variables such as changes in energy efficiency, population growth and per capita consumption. These lead to varying levels of total primary energy supply in 2050, with the lowest of the four scenarios seeing renewable energy accounting for a share of 15 percent in 2050, based on a total primary energy supply of 749 Exajoules.
While the report concludes that the proportion of renewable energy will likely increase even without enabling policies, past experience has shown that the largest increases come with concerted policy efforts.
Though in some cases renewable energy technologies are already economically competitive, the production costs are currently often higher than market energy prices. However, if environmental impacts such as emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases were monetized and included in energy prices, more renewable energy technologies may become economically attractive.
For most of them, costs have declined over the last decades and the authors expect significant technical advancements and further cost reductions in the future, resulting in a greater potential for climate change mitigation.
Public policies that recognize and reflect the wider economic, social and environmental benefits of renewable energies, including their potential to cut air pollution and improve public health, will be key for meeting the highest renewables deployment scenarios.
Increasing the share of renewables requires additional short-term and long-term integration efforts. Studies clearly show that combining different variable renewable sources, and resources from larger geographical areas, will be beneficial in smoothing the variability and decreasing overall uncertainty for the power system.
There is a need for advanced technologies to optimize the infrastructure capacity for renewables. Additionally, there is a need for balancing supply and demand, like advanced demand and supply forecasting and plant scheduling.
"What is unique about this assessment is that the IPCC allows us to draw on and bring together a
broad spectrum of experts on each of the technologies reviewed in collaboration with scientists studying energy systems as a whole. It represents a systemic, broad, impartial and state of knowledge report on the present and future potential of a low carbon, more resource efficient energy path," says Professor Edenhofer.
Key Findings from the Summary for Policymakers
- Of the around 300 Gigawatts (GW) of new electricity generating capacity added globally between 2008 and 2009, 140 GW came from renewable energy.
- Despite global financial challenges, renewable energy capacity grew in 2009—wind by over 30 percent; hydropower by three percent; grid-connected photovoltaics by over 50 percent;
geothermal by 4 percent and solar water/heating by over 20 percent. The annual production
of ethanol increased to 1.6 Exajoules (76 billion litres) and biodiesel by 0.6 Exajoules
(17 billion litres) by the end of 2009. Meanwhile developing countries host more than 50 percent of current global renewable energy capacity.
- Most of the reviewed scenarios estimate that renewables will contribute more to a low carbon energy supply by 2050 than nuclear power or fossil fuels using carbon capture and storage (CCS).
- The technical potential of renewable energy technologies exceeds the current global energy demand by a considerable amount—globally and in respect of most regions of the world.
- Under the scenarios analyzed in-depth, less than 2.5 percent of the globally available technical potential for renewables is used—in other words over 97 percent is untapped underlining that availability of renewable source will not be a limiting factor.
- Accelerating the deployment of renewable energies will present new technological and institutional challenges, in particular integrating them into existing energy supply systems and end use sectors.
- According to the four scenarios analyzed in detail, the decadal global investments in the renewable power sector range from 1,360 to 5,100 billion US dollars to 2020 and 1,490 to 7,180 billion US dollars for the decade 2021 to 2030. For the lower values, the average yearly investments are smaller than the renewable power sector investments reported for 2009.
- A combination of targeted public policies allied to research and development investments could reduce fuel and financing costs leading to lower additional costs for renewable energy technologies.
- Public policymakers could draw on a range of existing experience in order to design and implement the most effective enabling policies--there is no one-size-fits-all policy for encouraging renewables.
Key Renewable Energy Technologies and Their Potential
Bioenergy technologies can generate electricity, heat and fuels from a range of 'feedstocks'.
Most current bioenergy systems, including liquid biofuels, result in greenhouse gas emissions reductions, concludes the summary for policymakers.
Others, such as advanced conversion systems, which for example convert woody wastes into liquid fuels, can deliver 80 percent to 90 percent emission reductions compared to fossil fuels.
Bioenergy, mainly for traditional cooking and heating in developing countries, currently represents over 10 percent of global energy supply or ca. 50 Exajoules per year.
While the share of bioenergy in the overall renewables mix is likely to decline over the coming decades, it could supply 100 to 300 Exajoules of energy by 2050, the expert review concludes.
Direct Solar Energy technologies include photovoltaics and concentrating solar power (CSP). They can produce electricity, heat and light.
Currently, direct solar contributes only a fraction of one percent to total global energy supply.
Potential deployment scenarios range from a marginal role of direct solar energy in 2050 to one of the major sources of energy supply. The actual deployment will depend on continued innovation, cost reductions and supportive public policies.
In the most ambitious climate stabilization scenarios solar primary energy supply by 2050 reaches up to 130 Exajoules per year, which can be attributed to a large extent to photovoltaic electricity generation. In some scenarios, its share in global electricity generation reaches up to a third by 2050, but in the majority of scenarios remains below one tenth.
Geothermal Energy utilizes heat stored in the Earth‘s interior directly or to generate electricity, with currently about 0.7 Exajoule per year.
By 2050, geothermal deployment could meet more than 3 percent of global electricity demand and about 5 percent of the global heat demand.
Global geothermal technical potential is comparable to the global primary energy supply in 2008. However, Geothermal Energy does not reach the technical potential limit in any of the scenarios analyzed, with the deployment rate remaining below 5 percent for both the regional and global level.
Hydropower projects encompass dam projects with reservoirs, run-of-river and in-stream projects and range from small to large scale.
The installed capacity by the end of 2008 contributed 16 percent of worldwide electricity supply, making hydropower the largest renewable energy source in the electricity sector.
According to long term scenarios, hydropower's share in global electricity supply may decrease to 10 to 14 percent. Despite absolute growth in hydropower supply, the expected energy demand growth and continuing electrification could result in a decreasing share.
Ocean Energy technologies are diverse and use the kinetic, thermal, and chemical energy of seawater. Most are at the demonstration and pilot project phases.
Due to its nascent stage of development, they are unlikely to significantly contribute to global energy supply before 2020.
Ocean energy is currently only represented in very few scenarios. As shown by the review, projected deployments could result in energy delivery of up to 7 Exajoules per year by 2050.
Wind Energy’s primary application of relevance to climate change mitigation is to produce electricity from large wind turbines located on land or offshore.
The wind power capacity installed by the end of 2009 met close to two percent of worldwide electricity demand.
The review shows a high expansion rate in Europe, North America and, more recently, in China and India. A greater geographical distribution of deployment is likely to be needed to achieve the higher deployments indicated by the scenario literature.
Under the demand projection of some scenarios global wind power share grows to more than 20 percent by 2050.
Notes to Editors
1. The Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) assesses the potential contribution of renewable energy sources to climate change mitigation.
Following the AR4, many governments as well as important actors in civil society and the private sector asked for more substantial information and broader coverage of all questions pertaining to the use of renewable energy. The 25th Plenary Session of the IPCC at Mauritius decided to hold a scoping meeting for a possible Special Report, Following the scoping meeting in Lübeck, Germany in January, 2008, IPCC Plenary in Budapest in April, 2008 decided to prepare an IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and agreed on its outline. The Summary for Policymakers of the SRREN was approved by the Eleventh Plenary Session of IPCC Working Group III in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 5 - 8 May 2011 and was launched on 9 May.
2. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to review and assess the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data. The UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
3. The IPCC Plenary is open to all member countries of the United Nations and WMO. Currently 194 countries are members of the IPCC. Governments participate in the review process and the Plenary Sessions, where main decisions about the IPCC work programme are taken and reports are accepted, adopted and approved. The IPCC Bureau Members, including the Chair, are elected during the Plenary Sessions.
4. The Working Group III (WGIII) ̳Mitigation of Climate Change‘ of the IPCC assesses all relevant options for mitigating climate change through limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing activities that remove them from the atmosphere. WGIII analyses the costs, benefits and risks of the different approaches to mitigation, considering also the available domestic instruments and policy measures as well as international arrangements. The WGIII is co-chaired by Ottmar Edenhofer of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Germany, Ramon Pichs of the Centro de Investigaciones de la Economía Mundial, Cuba, and Youba Sokona (Mali) of the Africa Climate Policy Center in Ethiopia.
For Further Information Please Contact: Nick Nuttall, IPCC Plenary Spokesperson, on Tel+ 254 733 632755 or E-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org
Rockaya Aidara, IPCC Press Officer, on Tel: +41 22 730 8120 or E-mail: raidara@wmo.int
Useful links:
SRREN Website
www.srren.org
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch
Working Group III Mitigation of Climate Change
www.ipcc-wg3.de
IPCC on Renewable Energy
I know this has been posted before, but recent postings have made it clear that it requires more exposure. Press release by IPCC, there are no copyright issues.
PRESS RELEASE
Potential of Renewable Energy Outlined in Report by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Experts Underline Significant Future Role in Cutting Greenhouse Gas Emissions and
Powering Sustainable Development
Over 160 Scenarios on the Potential of six Renewable Energy Technologies Reviewed by
Global Team of Technological Experts and Scientists
11th Session of Working Group III
Abu Dhabi, 9 May 2011 – Close to 80 percent of the world‘s energy supply could be met by
renewables by mid-century if backed by the right enabling public policies a new report shows.
The findings, from over 120 researchers working with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), also indicate that the rising penetration of renewable energies could lead to cumulative greenhouse gas savings equivalent to 220 to 560 Gigatonnes of carbon dioxide (GtC02eq) between 2010 and 2050.
The upper end of the scenarios assessed, representing a cut of around a third in greenhouse gas emissions from business-as-usual projections, could assist in keeping concentrations of greenhouse gases at 450 parts per million.
This could contribute towards a goal of holding the increase in global temperature below 2 degrees Celsius – an aim recognized in the United Nations Climate Convention's Cancun Agreements.
The findings, launched today after being approved by member countries of the IPCC in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, are contained in a summary for policymakers of the Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN).
The summary is a short version of a roughly a thousand page comprehensive assessment compiled by over 120 leading experts from all over the world for IPCC‘s Working Group III.
"With consistent climate and energy policy support, renewable energy sources can contribute substantially to human well-being by sustainably supplying energy and stabilizing the climate," said Professor Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-Chair of Working Group III at the report launch. "However, the substantial increase of renewables is technically and politically very challenging" he added.
Youba Sokona, Co-Chair of the Working Group III, said:
"The potential role of renewable energy technologies in meeting the needs of the poor and in powering the sustainable growth of developing and developed economies can trigger sharply polarized views. This IPCC report has brought some much needed clarity to this debate in order to inform governments on the options and decisions that will needed if the world is to collectively realize a low carbon, far more resource efficient and equitable development path".
Ramon Pichs, Co-Chair of the Working Group III, added:
"The report shows that it is not the availability of the resource, but the public policies that will either expand or constrain renewable energy development over the coming decades. Developing countries have an important stake in this future—this is where most of the 1.4 billion people without access to electricity live yet also where some of the best conditions exist for renewable energy deployment".
Also speaking at the launch, Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the IPCC, said:
"The IPCC brought together the most relevant and best available information to provide the world with this scientific assessment of the potential of renewable energy sources to mitigate climate change. The Special Report can serve as a sound knowledge basis for policymakers to take on this major challenge of the 21st century."
The report will feed into the broader work of the IPCC as it prepares its Fifth Assessment Report (AR5). The AR5 Synthesis Report is scheduled for finalization in September 2014.
The SRREN, approved by government representatives from 194 nations, has reviewed the current penetration of six renewable energy technologies and their potential deployment over the coming decades.
The six renewable energy technologies reviewed are:
- Bioenergy, including energy crops; forest, agricultural and livestock residues and so called second generation biofuels
- Direct solar energy including photovoltaics and concentrating solar power
- Geothermal energy, based on heat extraction from the Earth‘s interior
- Hydropower, including run-of-river, in-stream or dam projects with reservoirs
- Ocean energy, ranging from barrages to ocean currents and ones which harness temperature
differences in the marine realm
- Wind energy, including on- and offshore systems
Over 160 existing scientific scenarios on the possible penetration of renewables by 2050, alongside environmental and social implications, have been reviewed with four analyzed in-depth. These four were chosen in order to represent the full range. Scenarios are used to explore possible future worlds, analyzing alternative pathways of socio-economic development and technological change.
The researchers have also studied the challenges linked to how renewable energy can be integrated into existing and future energy systems including electricity grids and likely cost benefits from these developments.
While the scenarios arrive at a range of estimates, the overall conclusions are that renewables will take an increasing slice of the energy market.
The most optimistic of the four, in-depth scenarios projects renewable energy accounting for as much as 77 percent of the world‘s energy demand by 2050, amounting to about 314 of 407 Exajoules per year. As a comparison, 314 Exajoules is over three times the annual energy supply in the United States in 2005 which is also a similar level of supply on the Continent of Europe according to various government and independent sources.
77 percent is up from just under 13 percent of the total primary energy supply of around 490 Exajoules in 2008. Each of the scenarios is underpinned by a range of variables such as changes in energy efficiency, population growth and per capita consumption. These lead to varying levels of total primary energy supply in 2050, with the lowest of the four scenarios seeing renewable energy accounting for a share of 15 percent in 2050, based on a total primary energy supply of 749 Exajoules.
While the report concludes that the proportion of renewable energy will likely increase even without enabling policies, past experience has shown that the largest increases come with concerted policy efforts.
Though in some cases renewable energy technologies are already economically competitive, the production costs are currently often higher than market energy prices. However, if environmental impacts such as emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases were monetized and included in energy prices, more renewable energy technologies may become economically attractive.
For most of them, costs have declined over the last decades and the authors expect significant technical advancements and further cost reductions in the future, resulting in a greater potential for climate change mitigation.
Public policies that recognize and reflect the wider economic, social and environmental benefits of renewable energies, including their potential to cut air pollution and improve public health, will be key for meeting the highest renewables deployment scenarios.
Increasing the share of renewables requires additional short-term and long-term integration efforts. Studies clearly show that combining different variable renewable sources, and resources from larger geographical areas, will be beneficial in smoothing the variability and decreasing overall uncertainty for the power system.
There is a need for advanced technologies to optimize the infrastructure capacity for renewables. Additionally, there is a need for balancing supply and demand, like advanced demand and supply forecasting and plant scheduling.
"What is unique about this assessment is that the IPCC allows us to draw on and bring together a
broad spectrum of experts on each of the technologies reviewed in collaboration with scientists studying energy systems as a whole. It represents a systemic, broad, impartial and state of knowledge report on the present and future potential of a low carbon, more resource efficient energy path," says Professor Edenhofer.
Key Findings from the Summary for Policymakers
- Of the around 300 Gigawatts (GW) of new electricity generating capacity added globally between 2008 and 2009, 140 GW came from renewable energy.
- Despite global financial challenges, renewable energy capacity grew in 2009—wind by over 30 percent; hydropower by three percent; grid-connected photovoltaics by over 50 percent;
geothermal by 4 percent and solar water/heating by over 20 percent. The annual production
of ethanol increased to 1.6 Exajoules (76 billion litres) and biodiesel by 0.6 Exajoules
(17 billion litres) by the end of 2009. Meanwhile developing countries host more than 50 percent of current global renewable energy capacity.
- Most of the reviewed scenarios estimate that renewables will contribute more to a low carbon energy supply by 2050 than nuclear power or fossil fuels using carbon capture and storage (CCS).
- The technical potential of renewable energy technologies exceeds the current global energy demand by a considerable amount—globally and in respect of most regions of the world.
- Under the scenarios analyzed in-depth, less than 2.5 percent of the globally available technical potential for renewables is used—in other words over 97 percent is untapped underlining that availability of renewable source will not be a limiting factor.
- Accelerating the deployment of renewable energies will present new technological and institutional challenges, in particular integrating them into existing energy supply systems and end use sectors.
- According to the four scenarios analyzed in detail, the decadal global investments in the renewable power sector range from 1,360 to 5,100 billion US dollars to 2020 and 1,490 to 7,180 billion US dollars for the decade 2021 to 2030. For the lower values, the average yearly investments are smaller than the renewable power sector investments reported for 2009.
- A combination of targeted public policies allied to research and development investments could reduce fuel and financing costs leading to lower additional costs for renewable energy technologies.
- Public policymakers could draw on a range of existing experience in order to design and implement the most effective enabling policies--there is no one-size-fits-all policy for encouraging renewables.
Key Renewable Energy Technologies and Their Potential
Bioenergy technologies can generate electricity, heat and fuels from a range of 'feedstocks'.
Most current bioenergy systems, including liquid biofuels, result in greenhouse gas emissions reductions, concludes the summary for policymakers.
Others, such as advanced conversion systems, which for example convert woody wastes into liquid fuels, can deliver 80 percent to 90 percent emission reductions compared to fossil fuels.
Bioenergy, mainly for traditional cooking and heating in developing countries, currently represents over 10 percent of global energy supply or ca. 50 Exajoules per year.
While the share of bioenergy in the overall renewables mix is likely to decline over the coming decades, it could supply 100 to 300 Exajoules of energy by 2050, the expert review concludes.
Direct Solar Energy technologies include photovoltaics and concentrating solar power (CSP). They can produce electricity, heat and light.
Currently, direct solar contributes only a fraction of one percent to total global energy supply.
Potential deployment scenarios range from a marginal role of direct solar energy in 2050 to one of the major sources of energy supply. The actual deployment will depend on continued innovation, cost reductions and supportive public policies.
In the most ambitious climate stabilization scenarios solar primary energy supply by 2050 reaches up to 130 Exajoules per year, which can be attributed to a large extent to photovoltaic electricity generation. In some scenarios, its share in global electricity generation reaches up to a third by 2050, but in the majority of scenarios remains below one tenth.
Geothermal Energy utilizes heat stored in the Earth‘s interior directly or to generate electricity, with currently about 0.7 Exajoule per year.
By 2050, geothermal deployment could meet more than 3 percent of global electricity demand and about 5 percent of the global heat demand.
Global geothermal technical potential is comparable to the global primary energy supply in 2008. However, Geothermal Energy does not reach the technical potential limit in any of the scenarios analyzed, with the deployment rate remaining below 5 percent for both the regional and global level.
Hydropower projects encompass dam projects with reservoirs, run-of-river and in-stream projects and range from small to large scale.
The installed capacity by the end of 2008 contributed 16 percent of worldwide electricity supply, making hydropower the largest renewable energy source in the electricity sector.
According to long term scenarios, hydropower's share in global electricity supply may decrease to 10 to 14 percent. Despite absolute growth in hydropower supply, the expected energy demand growth and continuing electrification could result in a decreasing share.
Ocean Energy technologies are diverse and use the kinetic, thermal, and chemical energy of seawater. Most are at the demonstration and pilot project phases.
Due to its nascent stage of development, they are unlikely to significantly contribute to global energy supply before 2020.
Ocean energy is currently only represented in very few scenarios. As shown by the review, projected deployments could result in energy delivery of up to 7 Exajoules per year by 2050.
Wind Energy’s primary application of relevance to climate change mitigation is to produce electricity from large wind turbines located on land or offshore.
The wind power capacity installed by the end of 2009 met close to two percent of worldwide electricity demand.
The review shows a high expansion rate in Europe, North America and, more recently, in China and India. A greater geographical distribution of deployment is likely to be needed to achieve the higher deployments indicated by the scenario literature.
Under the demand projection of some scenarios global wind power share grows to more than 20 percent by 2050.
Notes to Editors
1. The Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) assesses the potential contribution of renewable energy sources to climate change mitigation.
Following the AR4, many governments as well as important actors in civil society and the private sector asked for more substantial information and broader coverage of all questions pertaining to the use of renewable energy. The 25th Plenary Session of the IPCC at Mauritius decided to hold a scoping meeting for a possible Special Report, Following the scoping meeting in Lübeck, Germany in January, 2008, IPCC Plenary in Budapest in April, 2008 decided to prepare an IPCC Special Report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation (SRREN) and agreed on its outline. The Summary for Policymakers of the SRREN was approved by the Eleventh Plenary Session of IPCC Working Group III in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 5 - 8 May 2011 and was launched on 9 May.
2. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the leading international body for the assessment of climate change. It was established by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in 1988 to review and assess the most recent scientific, technical and socio-economic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. It does not conduct any research nor does it monitor climate related data. The UN General Assembly endorsed the action by WMO and UNEP in jointly establishing the IPCC.
3. The IPCC Plenary is open to all member countries of the United Nations and WMO. Currently 194 countries are members of the IPCC. Governments participate in the review process and the Plenary Sessions, where main decisions about the IPCC work programme are taken and reports are accepted, adopted and approved. The IPCC Bureau Members, including the Chair, are elected during the Plenary Sessions.
4. The Working Group III (WGIII) ̳Mitigation of Climate Change‘ of the IPCC assesses all relevant options for mitigating climate change through limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions and enhancing activities that remove them from the atmosphere. WGIII analyses the costs, benefits and risks of the different approaches to mitigation, considering also the available domestic instruments and policy measures as well as international arrangements. The WGIII is co-chaired by Ottmar Edenhofer of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Germany, Ramon Pichs of the Centro de Investigaciones de la Economía Mundial, Cuba, and Youba Sokona (Mali) of the Africa Climate Policy Center in Ethiopia.
For Further Information Please Contact: Nick Nuttall, IPCC Plenary Spokesperson, on Tel+ 254 733 632755 or E-mail: nick.nuttall@unep.org
Rockaya Aidara, IPCC Press Officer, on Tel: +41 22 730 8120 or E-mail: raidara@wmo.int
Useful links:
SRREN Website
www.srren.org
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
www.ipcc.ch
Working Group III Mitigation of Climate Change
www.ipcc-wg3.de
May 19, 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/feb/07/carbon-emissions-uk-energy-nuclear?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
Leaping UK carbon emissions deliver two red-hot lessons
Leaping UK carbon emissions deliver two red-hot lessons
An 18m tonne rise in climate-warming gases is due to the nation's dreadfully draughty homes and fickleness of nuclear power: new boy Ed Davey must deal with both
... he must prevent his department's flagship "green deal" plan to boost the warmth of the nation's ageing and draughty homes from self-combusting in a blaze of apathy, as it is currently on course to do. Secondly, he must pour a little cold water on the UK establishment's burning love affair with nuclear power, to take better account of its unreliability.
The biggest single cause of the first rise in the nation's carbon footprint since 2003 was from the increased heating of homes during cold weather at the start and end of 2010. People faced a choice when winter's chill began to bite: they could turn up the heating, despite the soaring cost of energy, or tackle the draughts through which the heat escapes. The 12 million tonnes of carbon dioxide added to national emissions from home heating alone - two-thirds of the entire rise - shows the people of Britain overwhelmingly chose the former.
...
Virtually all of the rest of the leap in the UK's carbon emissions comes from technical problems forcing nuclear power stations to shut down. The biggest reactor in the country, Sizewell B, was offline for six months, meaning more coal and gas had to be burned to fill the electricity gap, pumping more climate-warming gases into the air. Other reactors had problems too in 2010 and more recently events as varied as a rogue school of jellyfish and winter tornadoes have closed atomic energy plants.
When a wind turbine explodes, as in a recent storm, a megwatt of power is lost. When a nuclear plant falls off the grid, 1000 megawatts is lost. The comparison puts the lie to the sceptics charge that wind power is "unreliable"....
An 18m tonne rise in climate-warming gases is due to the nation's dreadfully draughty homes and fickleness of nuclear power: new boy Ed Davey must deal with both
... he must prevent his department's flagship "green deal" plan to boost the warmth of the nation's ageing and draughty homes from self-combusting in a blaze of apathy, as it is currently on course to do. Secondly, he must pour a little cold water on the UK establishment's burning love affair with nuclear power, to take better account of its unreliability.
The biggest single cause of the first rise in the nation's carbon footprint since 2003 was from the increased heating of homes during cold weather at the start and end of 2010. People faced a choice when winter's chill began to bite: they could turn up the heating, despite the soaring cost of energy, or tackle the draughts through which the heat escapes. The 12 million tonnes of carbon dioxide added to national emissions from home heating alone - two-thirds of the entire rise - shows the people of Britain overwhelmingly chose the former.
...
Virtually all of the rest of the leap in the UK's carbon emissions comes from technical problems forcing nuclear power stations to shut down. The biggest reactor in the country, Sizewell B, was offline for six months, meaning more coal and gas had to be burned to fill the electricity gap, pumping more climate-warming gases into the air. Other reactors had problems too in 2010 and more recently events as varied as a rogue school of jellyfish and winter tornadoes have closed atomic energy plants.
When a wind turbine explodes, as in a recent storm, a megwatt of power is lost. When a nuclear plant falls off the grid, 1000 megawatts is lost. The comparison puts the lie to the sceptics charge that wind power is "unreliable"....
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/feb/07/carbon-emissions-uk-energy-nuclear?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
May 19, 2012
This is a hard charging slide presentation that is best viewed with your finger on the pause button.
Xpost V&M: Solar Energy in Germany
Solar Energy in GermanyThis is a hard charging slide presentation that is best viewed with your finger on the pause button.
May 19, 2012
This link downloads the PDF of the study 'Understanding Trends in Wind Turbine Prices Over the Past Decade' by
Mark Bolinger and Ryan Wiser:
http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-5119e.pdf
How Low Can the Price of Wind Go?
"The learning curve theory contradiction, they found, is that “the largest single impact -- from scaling -- brings LCOE benefits.” Large-scale turbines allow wind projects to perform better. This “tradeoff between capital cost and performance” means that “LCOE is likely a better indicator of ‘technology learning’ than is capital cost,” the researchers reasoned."How Low Can the Price of Wind Go?
Like solar, wind’s LCOE now meets and beats fossil fuels.
HERMAN K. TRABISH: DECEMBER 29, 2011
A recent study of solar found that a properly calculated levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) is now competitive, and an LCOE presentation by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) researchers confirmed that wind is now at $33 to $65 per megawatt-hour and falling.
As with solar, the key to the accurate price of wind is reconciling numbers with facts. Learning curve theory, said LBNL researcher Mark Bolinger, predicts that wind price should have dropped 20 percent to 30 percent as installed capacity doubled twice between 2002 and 2008. But turbine cost, which is 50 percent to 60 percent of LCOE and 60 percent to 70 percent of project cost, doubled.
To understand this phenomenon, Bolinger and fellow LBNL researcher Ryan Wiser studied the four endogenous factors (labor costs, warranty provisions, profitability, turbine design/scaling) and three exogenous factors (raw materials prices, energy prices, foreign exchange rates) that determine turbine price.
It is a detailed study....
The learning curve theory contradiction, they found, is that “the largest single impact -- from scaling -- brings LCOE benefits.” Large-scale turbines allow wind projects to perform better. This “tradeoff between capital cost and performance” means that “LCOE is likely a better indicator of ‘technology learning’ than is capital cost,” the researchers reasoned...
More at: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/how-low-can-the-price-of-wind-go/
Like solar, wind’s LCOE now meets and beats fossil fuels.
HERMAN K. TRABISH: DECEMBER 29, 2011
A recent study of solar found that a properly calculated levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) is now competitive, and an LCOE presentation by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) researchers confirmed that wind is now at $33 to $65 per megawatt-hour and falling.
As with solar, the key to the accurate price of wind is reconciling numbers with facts. Learning curve theory, said LBNL researcher Mark Bolinger, predicts that wind price should have dropped 20 percent to 30 percent as installed capacity doubled twice between 2002 and 2008. But turbine cost, which is 50 percent to 60 percent of LCOE and 60 percent to 70 percent of project cost, doubled.
To understand this phenomenon, Bolinger and fellow LBNL researcher Ryan Wiser studied the four endogenous factors (labor costs, warranty provisions, profitability, turbine design/scaling) and three exogenous factors (raw materials prices, energy prices, foreign exchange rates) that determine turbine price.
It is a detailed study....
The learning curve theory contradiction, they found, is that “the largest single impact -- from scaling -- brings LCOE benefits.” Large-scale turbines allow wind projects to perform better. This “tradeoff between capital cost and performance” means that “LCOE is likely a better indicator of ‘technology learning’ than is capital cost,” the researchers reasoned...
More at: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/how-low-can-the-price-of-wind-go/
This link downloads the PDF of the study 'Understanding Trends in Wind Turbine Prices Over the Past Decade' by
Mark Bolinger and Ryan Wiser:
http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/lbnl-5119e.pdf
May 19, 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/may/18/energy-climate-davey-fossil-fuel-nuclear
UK Ministers must resist the siren call of spin to prevent climate failure
Ministers must resist the siren call of spin to prevent climate failure
Trying to tackle the huge challenge with policies that contradict each other and silly spin makes a tough job unnecessarily harder
Minister says the impact on fossil fuel prices by events abroad, such as the Arab spring, should be avoided, but are "inevitable" when it comes to nuclear: Andre Pain/EPA
No one thinks it will be easy to slash the carbon emissions driving climate change while keeping the lights on and at an affordable price. But trying to tackle the challenge with policies that contradict each other and silly spin makes a tough job unnecessarily harder.
Ed Davey, the energy and climate change secretary, launched a good report on Friday, suggesting the damage wrought on the UK's economy by spikes in global oil, gas and coal prices could be reduced by over half in 2050 as a result of climate change policies.
"Only last year, the impact of the Arab spring on wholesale gas prices, pushed up UK household bills by 20%," he said. "Every step the UK takes towards building a low-carbon economy reduces our dependency on fossil fuels, and on volatile global energy prices."
"The more we can shift to alternative fuels, and use energy efficiently, the more we can ensure that our economy does not become hostage to far-flung events and to the volatility of market forces," he added. So far, so sensible.
But what about the impact of far-flung events on the UK's faltering ambition to build new nuclear power stations? Well, that's a completely different story, apparently. Energy minister Charles Hendry was asked exactly that on Tuesday by MPs...
Trying to tackle the huge challenge with policies that contradict each other and silly spin makes a tough job unnecessarily harder
Minister says the impact on fossil fuel prices by events abroad, such as the Arab spring, should be avoided, but are "inevitable" when it comes to nuclear: Andre Pain/EPA
No one thinks it will be easy to slash the carbon emissions driving climate change while keeping the lights on and at an affordable price. But trying to tackle the challenge with policies that contradict each other and silly spin makes a tough job unnecessarily harder.
Ed Davey, the energy and climate change secretary, launched a good report on Friday, suggesting the damage wrought on the UK's economy by spikes in global oil, gas and coal prices could be reduced by over half in 2050 as a result of climate change policies.
"Only last year, the impact of the Arab spring on wholesale gas prices, pushed up UK household bills by 20%," he said. "Every step the UK takes towards building a low-carbon economy reduces our dependency on fossil fuels, and on volatile global energy prices."
"The more we can shift to alternative fuels, and use energy efficiently, the more we can ensure that our economy does not become hostage to far-flung events and to the volatility of market forces," he added. So far, so sensible.
But what about the impact of far-flung events on the UK's faltering ambition to build new nuclear power stations? Well, that's a completely different story, apparently. Energy minister Charles Hendry was asked exactly that on Tuesday by MPs...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2012/may/18/energy-climate-davey-fossil-fuel-nuclear
May 18, 2012
More at: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/brightsource-argues-for-a-new-way-to-value-solar-power-plants/
[E+C]-[P+T+G+I] = dramatic
BrightSource Argues for a New Way to Value Solar Power Plants
Net market value measures all the benefits and costs of delivering energy into the system.
HERMAN K. TRABISH: MAY 14, 2012
...The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is considering a new formula for such a cost assessment. In his April 5 Rulemaking, Commissioner Mark Ferron described a “least cost, best fit” formula for capturing the full range of costs and benefits of renewables selected to meet the state’s 33 percent renewables by 2020 renewable portfolio standard (RPS).
In it, the Net Market Value (R) of a generation source is defined as:
For an Adjusted Net Market Value (A), the CPUC would sum that Net Market Value (R) and Ancillary Services Value (S).
This is complicated stuff and researchers have not yet defined all of those factors. But it is a more effective way, explained BrightSource Energy Vice President for Government Affairs and Communications Joe Desmond, of evaluating the value a generation source is delivering into the system. “There is a lot of work being done in this area -- studies by NREL, studies by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, studies by the Cal ISO -- and they’re all converging on the need to look at the full cost of operating a system when we choose and compare among different resources.”
A group of Bingham McCutchen LLP attorneys said the formulation would “dramatically change the way utilities purchase renewable energy in California.” It proposes “to increase substantially the role of transmission planning in renewable procurement,” they said, and, with the addition of ancillary services into the equation, includes a generation source’s “potential positive impact on grid operation.”
...
Net market value measures all the benefits and costs of delivering energy into the system.
HERMAN K. TRABISH: MAY 14, 2012
...The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) is considering a new formula for such a cost assessment. In his April 5 Rulemaking, Commissioner Mark Ferron described a “least cost, best fit” formula for capturing the full range of costs and benefits of renewables selected to meet the state’s 33 percent renewables by 2020 renewable portfolio standard (RPS).
In it, the Net Market Value (R) of a generation source is defined as:
(Energy Value (E) + Capacity Value (C)) - (Post-Time-of-Delivery Adjusted Power Purchase Agreement Price (P) + Transmission Network Upgrade Costs (T) + Congestion Costs (G) + Integration Costs (I))
For an Adjusted Net Market Value (A), the CPUC would sum that Net Market Value (R) and Ancillary Services Value (S).
This is complicated stuff and researchers have not yet defined all of those factors. But it is a more effective way, explained BrightSource Energy Vice President for Government Affairs and Communications Joe Desmond, of evaluating the value a generation source is delivering into the system. “There is a lot of work being done in this area -- studies by NREL, studies by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, studies by the Cal ISO -- and they’re all converging on the need to look at the full cost of operating a system when we choose and compare among different resources.”
A group of Bingham McCutchen LLP attorneys said the formulation would “dramatically change the way utilities purchase renewable energy in California.” It proposes “to increase substantially the role of transmission planning in renewable procurement,” they said, and, with the addition of ancillary services into the equation, includes a generation source’s “potential positive impact on grid operation.”
...
More at: http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/brightsource-argues-for-a-new-way-to-value-solar-power-plants/
May 18, 2012
Solar Energy in Germany
This is a hard charging slide presentation really. Best viewed with your finger on the pause button.
Solar Energy in Germany
May 18, 2012
BY M. V. RAMANA | 19 APRIL 2011
Article Highlights
- Severe accidents at nuclear reactors have occurred much more frequently than what risk-assessment models predicted.
- The probabilistic risk assessment method does a poor job of anticipating accidents in which a single event, such as a tsunami, causes failures in multiple safety systems.
- Catastrophic nuclear accidents are inevitable, because designers and risk modelers cannot envision all possible ways in which complex systems can fail.
http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/beyond-our-imagination-fukushima-and-the-problem-of-assessing-risk
Beyond our imagination: Fukushima and the problem of assessing risk
Beyond our imagination: Fukushima and the problem of assessing riskBY M. V. RAMANA | 19 APRIL 2011
Article Highlights
- Severe accidents at nuclear reactors have occurred much more frequently than what risk-assessment models predicted.
- The probabilistic risk assessment method does a poor job of anticipating accidents in which a single event, such as a tsunami, causes failures in multiple safety systems.
- Catastrophic nuclear accidents are inevitable, because designers and risk modelers cannot envision all possible ways in which complex systems can fail.
http://thebulletin.org/web-edition/features/beyond-our-imagination-fukushima-and-the-problem-of-assessing-risk
May 18, 2012
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120517/NEWS08/305170045/Feds-quietly-cut-safety-drills-nuclear-power-plants
NRC: Proper response to Fukushima? Less preparedness.
Feds quietly cut safety drills at nuclear power plants
4:16 AM, May. 17, 2012
Written by Jeff Donn Associated Press
Without fanfare, the nation’s nuclear power regulators have overhauled community emergency planning for the first time in more than three decades, requiring fewer exercises for major accidents and recommending that fewer people be evacuated right away.
Nuclear watchdogs voiced surprise and dismay over the quietly adopted revamp — the first since the program began after the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979. Several said they were unaware of the changes until now, though they took effect in December.
At least four years in the works, the changes appear to clash with more recent lessons of last year’s reactor crisis in Japan. A mandate that local responders always run practice exercises for a radiation release has been eliminated — a move viewed as downright bizarre by some emergency planners.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which run the program together, have added one new exercise: More than a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, state and community police will now take part in exercises that prepare for a possible assault on their local plant....
4:16 AM, May. 17, 2012
Written by Jeff Donn Associated Press
Without fanfare, the nation’s nuclear power regulators have overhauled community emergency planning for the first time in more than three decades, requiring fewer exercises for major accidents and recommending that fewer people be evacuated right away.
Nuclear watchdogs voiced surprise and dismay over the quietly adopted revamp — the first since the program began after the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979. Several said they were unaware of the changes until now, though they took effect in December.
At least four years in the works, the changes appear to clash with more recent lessons of last year’s reactor crisis in Japan. A mandate that local responders always run practice exercises for a radiation release has been eliminated — a move viewed as downright bizarre by some emergency planners.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which run the program together, have added one new exercise: More than a decade after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, state and community police will now take part in exercises that prepare for a possible assault on their local plant....
http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120517/NEWS08/305170045/Feds-quietly-cut-safety-drills-nuclear-power-plants
Profile Information
Member since: Fri Dec 19, 2003, 02:20 AMNumber of posts: 29,798
