Energy FuturesHard Choices Ahead

Keith Tovey M.A., PhD, CEng, MICEEnergy Science Director: Low Carbon Innovation Centre

School of Environmental Sciences

Common Purpose Suffolk2nd Challenge Day

Otley College 6th October 2005

CRed

Future Global Warming RatesConcentration of C02 in Atmosphere

300

310

320

330

340

350

360

370

380

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

(ppm

)

Total winter precipitation Total summer precipitation

Source: Tim

Osborne, C

RU

Change in precipitation 1961-2001

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000T

emp

erat

ure

Ris

e (o C

)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Tem

per

atu

re R

ise

(o C)

1.0

0.5

0.0

-0.51860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000

Tem

per

atu

re R

ise

(o C)

Source: Hadley Centre, The Met.Office

actual

actual

actual

predicted

predicted

predictedIs Global Warming man made?

Prediction: Anthropogenic only

Not a good match between 1920 and 1970

Prediction: Natural only

good match until 1960

Prediction: Natural and Anthropogenic

Generally a good match

Predictions include:

• Greenhouse Gas emissions

• Sulphates and ozone

• Solar and volcanic activity

19792003

Climate ChangeArctic meltdown 1979 - 2003

• Summer ice coverage of Arctic Polar Region– Nasa satellite

imagery

Source: Nasa http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/topstory/2003/1023esuice.html

•20% reduction in 24 years

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Non-Renewable Methods

Gas CCGT0 - 80% (currently 40% and rising)

available now, but UK gas will run out within current decade

~ 2p + but recent trends put figure

much higher

nuclear fission (long term)

0 - 60% (France 80%) - (currently 20 - 25% and falling)

new inherently safe designs - some practical development needed

2.5 - 3.5p

nuclear fusion unavailablenot available until 2040 at earliest

"Clean Coal"

Traditional Coal falling rapidly -

coal could supply 40 - 50% by 2020

Basic components available - not viable without Carbon Sequestration

2.5 - 3.5p - but will EU - ETS affect

this

potential contribution to

Electricity Supply in 2020

costs in 2020

Difficult Choices Ahead

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Photovoltaic 50% available, but much research neededto bring down costs significantly

10+ p

Energy Crops 100% + available, but research needed insome areas

2.5 - 4

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Transport Fuels:

• Biodiesel?

• Bioethanol?

Photovoltaic 50% available, but much research neededto bring down costs significantly

10+ p

Energy Crops 100% + available, but research needed insome areas

2.5 - 4

Wave/TidalStream

100% + techology limited - extensivedevelopment unlikely before 2020

4 - 8p

Tidal Barrages 10 - 20% technology available but unlikelywithout Government intervention

notcosted

Geothermal unlikely for electricity generationbefore 2050 if then

On Shore Wind ~25% available now for commercialexploitation

~ 2p

Hydro 5% technically mature, but limitedpotential

2.5 - 3p

Resource Potential contribution to electricity supply in2020 and drivers/barriers

Cost in2020

Options for Electricity Generation in 2020 - Renewable

Solar Energy - The BroadSol Project

Annual Solar Gain 910 kWh

Solar Collectors installed 27th January 2004

House in Lerwick, Shetland Isles

- less than 15,000 people live north of this in UK!

It is all very well for South East, but what about the North?

Our Choices: They are difficult

If our answer is NO

Do we want to return to using coal? • then carbon dioxide emissions will rise significantly• unless we can develop carbon sequestration within 10 years which is unlikely

If our answer to coal is NO

Do we want to leave things are they are and see continued exploitation of gas for both heating and electricity generation? >>>>>>

Do we want to exploit available renewables i.e onshore/offshore wind and biomass. Photovoltaics, tidal, wave are not options for next 20 years.

If our answer is NO

Do we want to see a renewal of nuclear power

• Are we happy on this and the other attendant risks?

Our Choices: They are difficult

If our answer is YES

By 2020

• we will be dependent on around 70% of our heating and electricity from GAS

• imported from countries like Russia, Iran, Iraq, Libya, AlgeriaAre we happy with this prospect? >>>>>>

If not:

We need even more substantial cuts in energy use.

Or are we prepared to sacrifice our future to effects of Global Warming? - the North Norfolk Coal Field?

Do we wish to reconsider our stance on renewables?

Inaction or delays in decision making will lead us down the GAS option route

and all the attendant Security issues that raises.

Our Choices: They are difficult

A diverse renewable supply will be local, and will be less prone to cascade power cuts such as those recently in US, London, Italy, Denmark.

Conventional generation is based on large units: 500 – 660 MW enough to supply over 1 million homes. These do fail from time to time, and require much greater backup than required for the failure of a few wind turbines.

Renewable generation is less prone to major interruption

We must not get drawn into a single issue debate

– a rational debate covering all the alternatives is needed.

Available Renewables: Nuclear: Conservation

Local Small Scale generation saves 8.5% from losses in transmission

An important advantage over conventional generation or far Offshore Wind

Our Choices: They are difficult

• NETA has to cope with the loss of Sizewell B through a reactor trip. This loss amounts to around 1.5 times the total installed capacity of wind at present.

• NETA also has to cope with sudden changes in demand (up to 2.5 times Sizewell B) in a matter of minutes e.g. from TV scheduling.

• Experience from Denmark shows that the normal maximum change in any one hour from Wind Output is no more than 18% on one occasion in a year. With a larger country area the figures for diverse wind generation will be less in UK.

One will not save Carbon Dioxide because power stations are running in case they are needed.

• There is very little truth in this. The amount of carbon dioxide emitted is dependant on the output of a fossil fuel power station. If it is running under low load it will emit only a very small amount of extra CO2.

• Allowing for this, the effect of standby reserve will amount to a maximum of 15 – 20 gms per kWh of Wind Energy compared to 430 for gas or 1000 for coal.

• A substantial saving is made.

Renewable Energy: The Issues

Isn’t Energy from Renewables unreliable? – we need secure supply

Whilst the wind turbine is considered 'ugly' by some residents of Swaffham, most consider it a unique landmark and see it as an asset to the town. Most of the local population are proud of the turbine and it seems to have had a positive

impact on the town in a number of ways.

I do believe that were it not for the number of visitors to Swaffham, coming to see the turbine for whatever reason, we would not have such a high influx of buyers from out of the area. This has increased house prices, and the prosperity of

the area.

Our Choices: They are difficultAffect House Prices

• Evidence from Estate Agents in the Swaffham Area say they have a positive effect on house prices.

Our Choices: They are difficult

Wind Turbines are Incredibly Inefficient

Efficiency: the ratio of the USEFUL work to the total energy available (or expended)

Oxford English Dictionary

Modern Wind Turbines convert 40 – 42%% of available energy in the wind

Modern Coal Fired Power Stations achieve 38%

Sizewell B achieves 32%

A car engine achieve 30% at best

Compared to many other energy devices, Wind Turbines are Very Efficient

Our Choices: They are difficult

• Wind Turbines are beautiful!

» Wind Turbines are Ugly!

• What is the consequence of not using wind alongside conservation, biomass etc?.

• Insecure supply of Electricity when we import fossil fuels from Russia

• The North Norfolk Coal Field• Increased Famine• 20 new nuclear power stations in the UK by 2025• Increased incidence of extreme weather events.

Government Response

• Energy White Paper – aspiration for 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2050

• Will require unprecedented partnership activity in

local communities to ensure on track by 2020s

• (– but no indication of how this will be

undertaken)

“There will be much more local generation, in part from medium to small local/community power plant, fuelled by locally grown biomass, from locally generated waste, and from local wind sources. These will feed local distributed networks, which can sell excess capacity into the grid.’’

- Energy White Paper: February 2003

How many people know what 9 tonnes of CO2 looks like?

5 hot air balloons per person per year.

434000 each year for Mid Suffolk

576000 each year for Suffolk Coastal

On average each person in UK causes the emission of 9 tonnes of CO2 each year.

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he thought he could do only a little."

Edmund Burke (1727 – 1797)

One Party sized balloon is approximately equivalent

to 10 gms of CO2

CRed

Some facts:

A mobile phone charger left on even when not charging

up to 20 kg CO2 a year

Standby on television > 60 kg per year

Filling up with petrol (~£35 for a full tank)

--------- 90 kg of CO2 (5% of one balloon)

How far does one have to drive in a small family car (e.g. 1300 cc Toyota Corolla) to emit as much carbon dioxide as heating an old persons room for 1 hour?

1.6 miles

• Many residents on island of Burray (Orkney) compaigned for a wind turbine.

• On average they are fully self-sufficient in electricity needs and indeed are a net exporter of electricity

Involve the local Community

Electricity Statistics: Mid Suffolk : Suffolk Coastal

• Each house in Mid Suffolk consumes, on average 6167 kWh per year 35% more than a house in Ipswich.

• For Suffolk Coastal figures are 5610 kWh and 23%

• For Mid Suffolk 470 million kWh per year (236 million domestic)

• For Suffolk Coastal 615 million kWh per year (307 million domestic)

• A wind farm the size of Scroby Sands would supply 61% of domestic needs for whole of Mid Suffolk (or 31% of total demand)

• For Suffolk Coastal – figures are 47% and 23% respectively

• Would save ~ 70 000 to 75 000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year or 40 000 hot air balloons each year.

• The alternative:

• Persuade 30 000 motorists never to drive the car again

• Or 300 000 motorists to drive 1000 miles less each year.

Conclusions• Global Warming will affect us all - in next few decades

• Energy Security will become increasingly important. Inaction over making difficult decisions now will make Energy Security more likely in future.

• Move towards energy conservation and LOCAL generation of energy

It is as much about the individual’s response to use of energy as any technical measures the Government may take.

• Wind (and possibly biomass) are the only real alternatives for renewable generation in next 5 – 10 years.

• Otherwise Nuclear??? – but Uranium resources are limited

• Even if we are not convinced about Global Warming – Energy Security issues will shortly start to affect us.

WEBSITE

www.cred-uk.org/

This presentation will be available from tomorrow at

www2.env.uea.ac.uk/cred/creduea.htm

• Need to act now otherwise we might have to make choice of whether we drive 1.6 miles or heat an old person’s room

Conclusions

Are you up to the Challenge?: Will you make a pledge?