barbos
Contributor
Yeah, nuclear is the best option in Africa or even in Afghanistan.
And why there are no nuclear plants in ..... Australia?
And why there are no nuclear plants in ..... Australia?
Yeah, nuclear is the best option in Africa or even in Afghanistan.
And why there are no nuclear plants in ..... Australia?
Looking at this from the cynical perspective of the American legislative process, I have to wonder if lobbying by the coal industry had anything to do with it...There are no nuclear plants in Australia because of a political deal done by the Liberal/National party coalition with the Green and Democrat parties to make nuclear power illegal, in exchange for passing the hugely unpopular Goods and Services Tax.
The coal lobby here is enormously powerful. So it would be shocking if it did not.Looking at this from the cynical perspective of the American legislative process, I have to wonder if lobbying by the coal industry had anything to do with it...There are no nuclear plants in Australia because of a political deal done by the Liberal/National party coalition with the Green and Democrat parties to make nuclear power illegal, in exchange for passing the hugely unpopular Goods and Services Tax.
The US wind belt: Central Texas - Montana / North Dakota - (Canada) southern Saskatchewan / ManitobaWind power isn't the largest part of the United States' energy mix, but it grew over the last year, according to the Wind Technologies Market Report. The renewable energy source grew to more than 8 percent of the country's electricity supply—reaching 10 percent in a growing number of states—and saw a whopping $25 billion in investments in what will translate to 16.8 gigawatts of capacity, according to the report.
n large part, this increase is due to longer blades, which allow the turbines to generate more power as they're spun around by the wind. According to the report, in 2010 there were no turbines in the US that had rotors at or above 115 meters in diameter. However, last year, 91 percent of new turbines had rotors of this size or larger. The report also notes that this size is likely to increase.
The towers these rotors are attached to are also getting taller, sometimes along with the increase in blade size. According to Bolinger, this move isn't quite as widespread, but “it is starting to creep up now.”
In the past, there's been a “soft cap” of 500 feet on the total height of the turbines—from the base of the tower to the tip of the blades—because that triggers greater permitting requirements from the Federal Aviation Administration, he said. But with the size of the rotors increasing recently, the size of the towers themselves also needs to increase to avoid having the blades swing too low to the ground. Developers have gotten more comfortable going over 500 feet, he said, adding that some turbines are reaching 700 feet tall. Even besides the practical reason behind it, taller towers also help the turbines generate more energy.
“In general, the winds tend to be stronger at higher altitudes, so this is something that will increase the capacity factor,” he said.
The “wind belt” still sees the vast majority of wind development in the US. However this trend of larger turbines with larger rotors allows wind operators to function quite well in areas that have lower average wind speeds. “That does open up other parts of the country to economical wind development,” he said.
There are larger up-front costs to build these larger turbines, but at a dollar-per-watt basis they end up cheaper. They may be more expensive, but they produce more energy, Bolinger said.
Eric Lantz, group research manager at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), also says large turbines are the future of wind energy.
“The fewer turbines you put up per unit of energy in general results in a lower cost of energy,” Lantz said.
...
“As you get higher above ground, you get into better resource quality,” Lantz said. “Surface obstructions that slow the wind down, the higher you get above those, the more you get into free-flowing wind.”
Wind speeds also increase substantially with altitude: Lantz’s own research found that moving from 80 to 160 meters sees wind speeds increase from 1 to 1.5 meters per second. Faster winds generate more energy, so taller turbines are generally more efficient than shorter ones.
The MySE 16.0-242 boasts 16 megawatts of power, nearly 10 times the mean capacity of U.S. turbines, and is capable of powering 20,000 homes on its own over its 25-year service life. That’s 45 percent more than MingYang’s now second-largest turbine, the MySE 11.0-203, and enough to eliminate more than 1.6 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions from energy generation, the company claims.
So great to see.The U.S. added 16.8 gigawatts of new wind power capacity in 2020, while project costs declined and performance improved, according to the Dept. of Energy’s annual report on the industry.
The 2021 Land-based Wind Market Report, prepared by the Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, found that wind increased its share of the U.S. electricity supply last year to 8%, fueled by $25 billion of investment and the federal production tax credit.
The University of West Virginia is angling to have its campus become the proving ground for the first large scale geothermal heating and cooling system in the northeast region. The school’s campus in Morgantown has already replaced a coal power plant with natural gas and switching to geothermal is the next step, with an assist from the US Department of Energy.
“With an abundance of natural resources literally at our feet, the time is now to reap the benefits of the value beneath the ground. This [Energy Department] funding is a great step forward in having WVU in our hometown of Morgantown be the first to combine the technologies developed by the oil and gas industry in our region to extract geothermal energy for heating and cooling,” enthuses said Brian Anderson, who now is the director of NETL
Like flow batteries, compressed air, and raising and lowering solid objects.Located in Moss Landing near Monterey, California, the facility got under way in 2020 and it just completed an expansion, bringing its capacity to 400 megawatts or 1,600 megawatt-hours, depending on who’s counting and why. According to Vistra, the expansion kicked Moss Landing into world’s record territory.
That’s nothing. So far, work on the first two phases has progressed ahead of schedule, and Vistra is looking forward to another expansion that will bring the plant up to 1,500 megawatts, which translates into 6,000 megawatt-hours.
...
That figure of 22,500 homes sounds impressive, but the big question is for how long. Battery-type energy storage systems typically only last just a few hours. That is enough to power a grid past peak demand periods without having to dial up additional fossil energy capacity, typically in the form of natural gas. However, four hours is not nearly long enough to replace all existing “peaker” plants.
Our friends over at Power Magazine recently cited a study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, which indicates that about 150 gigawatts in fossil energy peaker plant capacity is on track to retire within the next 20 years in the US. Battery-type energy storage facilities could only replace about 28 of those gigawatts under a four-hour scenario.
To replace the rest, something that lasts longer than four hours or so is needed. The US Department of Energy has been hammering away at the problem under its DAYS “Duration Added to ElectricitY Storage” program. The acronym is a bit of a stretch, and so is the endeavor. DAYS is looking for a minimum of 10 hours of energy storage, preferably reaching 100 hours or more.
Herein, we introduce a novel class of non-metal flow batteries, the CO2 redox flow battery (CRB). In the present variant, the CRB utilizes the CO2/HCOO− redox couple at the negative electrode and Br−/Br2 at the positive electrode with a battery open-circuit cell potential of 1.5 V.
Swedish Steelmaker Uses Hydrogen Instead Of Coal To Make Fossil-Free SteelVolvo has received the world’s first shipment of fossil-free steel from Swedish manufacturer SSAB.
The steel was reduced using 100% fossil-free hydrogen, instead of coal and coke. SSAB said the trial delivery is an important step to developing a completely fossil-free value chain for iron and steelmaking.
SSAB is taking the lead in decarbonizing the steel industry - SSABThe steel industry accounts for some 5-8% of the world's carbon dioxide emissions, as well as around 10-15% of its total coal demand.
So far, however, the steel-making process has withstood engineers’ best efforts to clean it up: there are simply too few low-cost replacements of key inputs such as coking coal and coke.
“With HYBRIT technology, we will eliminate carbon dioxide emissions in steel production,” said Martin Lindqvist, President and C.E.O. of SSAB. “We have the opportunity to revolutionize an entire industry and show that net zero emissions are possible. We must take that chance.”
Consultants and oil company executives argue that an interim step to reaching large-scale green hydrogen production is to capture and store carbon generated by making hydrogen from natural gas to reduce emissions—making what is known as blue hydrogen.
Critics contend that the fossil fuel giants have been heavily talking up hydrogen as most of the world’s hydrogen supply is currently produced from natural gas. Blue hydrogen may offer an intermediate step towards green hydrogen. However, it may also end up like coal power with CCS: previously hailed as a promising way of reducing emissions but now seen as a costly dead-end that provided cover for the last burst of coal investments in Asia.
Others argue that oil and gas companies are pouring money into lobbying efforts to direct public investment towards building a hydrogen economy (with considerable success notable in Canada, Germany, and the UK) to delay the transition to electrification. These companies will be key players embedded in the hydrogen value chain if the fuel “works”, and will have slowed the shift to electricity if it does not.
That's HOME - UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) at the SEC – Glasgow 2021Hydrogen is a versatile, safe and clean form of energy. It is used as a fuel for power and in industry for feedstock. With the potential for zero emissions at the point of use, its only by-product can be water and it can be stored and transported in liquid or gas form.
Many take the view that hydrogen could be a key solution to many of the challenges that need to be overcome to make a low carbon environment a reality. Indeed, hydrogen has the potential to decarbonise hard-to-abate sectors such as heavy industry and heavy-duty transport and chemicals which together are responsible for over one third of global CO2 emissions.
But surely, we already knew this?
The use of hydrogen in industry is nothing new. The reason why hydrogen is so much in focus today is because it is now needed, along with electrification, in significantly greater quantities to drive energy transition across all sectors. But with that comes various challenges, which often tend to stem from the manufacturing process.
1. Secure global net zero by mid-century and keep 1.5 degrees within reach ...
2. Adapt to protect communities and natural habitats ...
3. Mobilise finance ...
4. Work together to deliver ...
A flow battery and electrolyzer together? Looks great.The LEPA system combines a conventional redox flow battery (RFB) with two catalytic reactors that are able to produce green hydrogen by utilizing the fluid that runs through the battery. Unlike conventional redox flow batteries, the dual-flow battery, once it is fully charged, can discharge its fluid into the catalytic reactors, thus creating more storage space. “The dual-circuit RFB has the advantage of offering two discharging modes, and to store energy beyond the energy capacity of the electrolytes in the form of renewable hydrogen energy storage,” the Swiss group stated.
Possibility of doing what?With the emergence of hydrogen as a seriously-considered possibility
What | Specific Energy (MJ/kg) |
---|---|
Hydrogen | 142 |
Methane | 55.6 |
Liquid hydrocarbons | 43 - 46 |
Coal, anthracite | 26 - 33 |
Coal, bituminous | 24 - 35 |
Methanol | 19.7 |
Ammonia | 18.6 |
Lithium-ion battery | 0.36 - 0.875 |
Alkaline battery | 0.48 |
Nickel-metal-hydride battery | 0.41 |
Lead-acid battery | 0.17 |
Essentially Hydrogen is like hydrocarbons, only trendier, harder to store and handle, more dangerous to use in vehicles, and without an existing infrastructure to distribute it worldwide.Hydrogen, like other combustible fuels, has a much higher density of usable energy than any battery. Energy density has some tables, though the combustion-energy table leaves out the mass of oxygen consumed.
What Specific Energy (MJ/kg) Hydrogen 142 Methane 55.6 Liquid hydrocarbons 43 - 46 Coal, anthracite 26 - 33 Coal, bituminous 24 - 35 Methanol 19.7 Ammonia 18.6 Lithium-ion battery 0.36 - 0.875 Alkaline battery 0.48 Nickel-metal-hydride battery 0.41 Lead-acid battery 0.17
Hydrogen is good as a fuel, but its boiling point is 20 K or -253 C -- very low. However, one can produce a variety of synthetic fuels with it, like ammonia (mp -78 C, bp -33 C), methanol (mp -67 C, bp 65 C), and hydrocarbons. Some of them can also serve as plastics feedstocks, and ammonia is well-known as a fertilizer feedstock.
Hydrogen can also help solve the storage problem. One makes hydrogen with electrolysis, then gets electricity from it with fuel cells.
I was under the impression that hydrogen brings its own storage problems which need to be solved before it becomes a viable fuel.Hydrogen can also help solve the storage problem. One makes hydrogen with electrolysis, then gets electricity from it with fuel cells.