http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/Coal/26015975

Coal remained the world's fastest-growing fossil fuel in 2012, despite the rate of consumption slipping below the 10-year average of 4.4% during the year, according to the BP 2013 Statistical Review of World Energy released Wednesday.

Total global coal consumption in 2012 rose 2.5% on the year...

Technology Roadmap: Solar Heating and Cooling

Overview

The solar heating and cooling (SHC) roadmap outlines a pathway for solar energy to supply almost one sixth (16.5 EJ) of the world’s total energy use for both heating and cooling by 2050. This would save some 800 megatonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per year; more than the total CO2 emissions in Germany in 2009.

While solar heating and cooling today makes a modest contribution to world energy demand, the roadmap envisages that if concerted action is taken by governments and industry, solar energy could annually produce more than 16% of total final energy use for low temperature heat and nearly 17% for cooling. Given that global energy demand for heat represents almost half of the world’s final energy use – more than the combined global demand for electricity and transport – solar heat can make a significant contribution in both tackling climate change and strengthening energy security.

Key Findings

Solar collectors for hot water and space heating could reach an installed capacity of nearly 3 500 GWth, satisfying annually around 8.9 EJ of energy demand for hot water and space heating in the building sector by 2050. Solar hot water and space heating accounts for 14% of space and water heating energy use by that time.

Solar collectors for low-temperature process heat in industry (< 120oC) could reach an installed capacity of 3 200 GWth, producing around 7.2 EJ solar heat per year by 2050. Solar process heat accounts for 20% of energy use for low temperature industrial heat by that time.

Solar heat for cooling could reach a contribution of 1.5 EJ per year from an installed capacity of more than 1 000 GWth for cooling, accounting for nearly 17% of energy use for cooling in 2050.

Swimming pool heating could reach an installed capacity of 200 GWth, producing annually around 400 PJ solar heat by 2050.

By achieving the above mentioned deployment levels, solar heating and cooling can avoid some 800 megatonnes (Mt) of CO2 emissions per year by 2050.

Achieving this roadmap’s vision requires a rapid expansion of solar hot water heating in the building sector, including in solar supported district heating, as well as in industrial applications. Dedicated policy support should overcome barriers related to information failures, split incentives and high up-front investments.

While a number of industrial and agricultural processes can use low-temperature flat-plate collectors, advanced flat-plate collectors and concentrating technology should be further developed to produce medium-temperature heat. Industrial process heat offers enormous potential in sectors that use low- and medium-temperature heat for processes such as washing, leaching (mining industry), drying of agricultural products, pre-heating of boiler feed water, pasteurisation and cooking.

The development of compact storage will allow heat to be transferred so that it can be used when the load is required, aiding the deployment of solar space heating in individual buildings. Dedicated research, development and demonstration (RD&D) resources could make compact storage commercially viable between 2020 and 2030.

Solar cooling could avoid the need for additional electricity transmission capacity caused by higher average peak loads from the rapidly increasing cooling demand in many parts of the world. With substantially higher RD&D resources, standardised, cost competitive and reliable solar cooling systems could enter the market between 2015 and 2020.

Used with permission © 2013 OECD/IEA

No blackouts expected this summer amid San Onofre closure
Published: June 10, 2013
By David Sneed — dsneed@thetribunenews.com

Operators of the state’s electrical grid say they are not expecting disruptions of electrical service as a result of the permanent closure of San Onofre nuclear generating station.

“We are not predicting any blackouts or brownouts,” said Steven Greenlee, spokesman for the California Independent System Operator in Sacramento. “We are working with the utilities and state agencies to develop a plan for replacing that power.”

Total System Power for 2011: Changes from 2010
In 2011, Total System Power for California was marginally higher by half of a percent from 2010. The two primary reasons are the ongoing recession and continued mild temperatures. The effects of the recession resulted in a peak demand that was 5 percent less than the forecast. As for temperatures, they were lower than normal during the spring, near normal temperatures during the summer, and above normal temperatures during both the fall and winter.1 By design, California's electric generation system delivers electricity quickly to match peak air conditioning load conditions in the summer.

In-state generation declined by 2.4 percent in 2011 however net imports from the Northwest and Southwest combined made up for the difference. In particular, energy imports from the Northwest in 2011 increased by 42.7 percent due primarily to an increase in hydroelectric generation resulting from higher precipitation in the Northwest. Between March and May 2011, Oregon and Washington experienced their wettest periods in the last 116 and 117 years respectively.2

With the conversion of Mt. Poso Cogeneration coal facility to a biomass plant complete, the in-state coal category showed a slight decline from 2010. Mt. Poso Cogeneration is about 10 miles north of Bakersfield.

Large hydroelectric generation, a category based on nameplate capacity of 30 megawatts (MW) and larger, showed a significant increase of 24.8% for in-state generation. This coincides with California experiencing one of its wettest years. After three relatively dry years, statewide precipitation during the 2010 Water Year (ending September 30, 2010) was 105% of average. Precipitation during the 2011 Water Year (ending September 30, 2011) was 135% of average, and runoff was 146% of average. Though January 2011 was remarkably dry, the months of March and May were extremely wet with peak snowmelt in early July. As a result, in-state hydroelectric generation in 2011 was 127% of average compared to 101% in 2010.

Generally, when snowmelt and runoff is plentiful, California's hydroelectricity is less expensive to purchase than electricity generated by plants using natural gas-fired generation. Therefore, usage of natural gas-fired generation is reduced ("displaced&quot . This is especially so during the spring and fall months and during off-peak summer hours (afternoon and early evening hours). Wind generation increased in 2011 reflecting the continued siting of new wind projects in the state. Solar also saw some increase as commercial-scale systems came online in 2011.

Reporting requirements for Total System Power are limited to projects rated at 1MW and larger. Because most solar photovoltaic (PV) systems on residential households and businesses are less than 1 MW, data on them is not collected. As more installations of solar PV and other "behind the meter" distributed generation technologies take place, consumption of power delivered by utilities will continue to decrease. Whether to exclude these smaller systems from the Total System Power summary may need addressing in future, if the aggregate capacity and energy of such small systems becomes a significant portion of the state's generation mixture.

1 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2011/13
2 http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/national/2011/13

Southern California Edison's Problems Ensnare Entire Nuclear Energy Sector

The nuclear energy sector has taken a blow now that Southern California Edison has decided to permanently close its troubled nuclear plant. Safety is a key concern. But so is honesty and transparency.

<snip>

...two letters that have recently surfaced. They show that Southern California Edison had knowledge of the “vibrations” and their potentially “disastrous” results on nuclear operations.

Specifically, the utility’s then-plant manager penned two letters in 2004 and 2005 to its vendor, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries . Disruptive vibrations were occurring and causing tubes to prematurely wear out. That could cause radiation to leak, the manager had said, which is exactly what happened to one of the reactors in January 2012. The company decided to temporarily shut down both units at that time.

<snip>

In the final analysis, Craver says that maintaing the plant while also buying replacement fuel to meet the electricity needs of customers would have become non-economical at year-end. And with no plan in sight for a re-start of its one healthy unit, the company decided to pull the plug last Friday. Coincidentally, that decision came just a few days after the 2004 and 2005 letters became public. The generators were actually installed in 2009 and 2010, before the leak in 2012....