Feed aggregator

Elephants will certainly survive. But it may only be in ‘fortress’ conservation parks. Is there any way to allow elephants to stay wild?

I have just returned from Kenya’s North Eastern Province where one night, camped out in a dry riverbed with just a mosquito net for cover, a herd of elephants emerged out of the dark – a great and almost silent mass of shapes.

They passed through our makeshift camp, looming over us, their tusks white against the night. I was close enough to hear them breathe, to hear the sound of their feet in the sand. Another minute and they were gone, leaving me awestruck in the truest sense of the word.

Continue reading...

National Audit Office says household bills will be £17 higher annually than planned by 2020 due to the installation rate of windfarms and solar panels

Household energy bills in four years’ time will be £17 higher annually than planned because of the number of windfarms and solar panels installed in recent years, according to the government’s spending watchdog.

The amount of money levied on bills each year to pay for renewable energy subsidies is capped under a system called the levy control framework, to limit costs for consumers and businesses. The cap was set at £7.1bn for 2020/21, but government officials warned last year it was on track to hit £9.1bn because so much green energy was being deployed.

Continue reading...

Coalition campaign against state-based renewables targets – and the deployment of its most potent weapon, policy uncertainty – has reached a new heights over the past couple of months. Could Turnbull trump Abbott?

Claxton, Norfolk I laid my song thrush down in the earth where all those life scenes and memories and scents arose

Even in death it looked perfect, spots on his chest as bold as a summer’s morning. It was a dead song thrush. The tiny yellow tips to the coverts and the faintest crease of like colour at the corners of the beak suggested a bird of the year, inexperienced in the ways of cats or windows. Yet what to do with something so beautiful?

First I had work. Our garden is split in three – vegetables down one side; a middle lawn running all the way to autumn’s only colour, a cyclamen patch in the shadows under the hollies; and on the other side, by the hedge, a meadow area that has been left entirely to steer its own course for the past eight years.

Continue reading...

Elon Musk's EV project was so successful that Tim Cook decided his company should build its own electric car to compete with Tesla. How hard could it be?

The Montreal Protocol has successfully reduced the use of chemicals that destroy the Earth's ozone layer. Atmosphere image from www.shutterstock.com

Over the weekend, international leaders meeting in Kigali, Rwanda, agreed to a remarkable deal to phase-out hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), used as refrigerants and propellants. HFCs are potent greenhouse gases.

The agreement ended a decade of negotiations under the Montreal Protocol, established in 1987 to protect the ozone layer. Under the new agreement, developed nations will reduce HFCs 85% below current levels by 2036.

So how will the deal work?

Fixing the ozone hole

The Montreal Protocol was established under the Vienna Convention for the protection of the ozone layer. It followed evidence that chlorine atoms were damaging the stratospheric ozone, which protects the Earth from the most energetic ultraviolet radiation coming from the sun.

These chlorine atoms came from refrigerant and propellant gases, the chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), that we were releasing into the atmosphere.

By 1990, nations had agreed to restrict production and consumption of CFCs and a timetable for their eventual phase-out over the next two decades. More time was allowed for developing countries and a multilateral fund was established to help them meet their targets.

With just a few exceptions, complete phase-out has been achieved. As well as ozone protection, there was a climate benefit from phasing-out the CFCs because they are much stronger greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide.

Related gases that were less damaging to the ozone layer, the hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs), were next targeted and they will have been phased out by about 2020.

In developed countries such as Australia they have largely disappeared already, although there is still a lot of one HCFC, R-22, in older air-conditioners. Other ozone-depleting substances such as the fumigant methyl bromide and a number of solvents were also targeted for elimination under the Montreal Protocol.

New villain

Major replacements for the CFCs were the hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Their molecules contain no chlorine so they are “ozone friendly” but like the CFCs these substances are serious global warmers.

HFCs are not manufactured in Australia but we import several thousand tonnes each year, which is a small proportion of world production. Our imports will be capped from 2018 following a recent government decision.

Nations under the Montreal Protocol realised that by using HFCs to replace ozone-depleting substances they had contributed to another environmental problem – global warming and climate change.

Despairing of any action under the climate change-centred Kyoto Protocol, the representatives of developed countries began to push for addition of HFCs to the Montreal Protocol where production and consumption data could be monitored and there was potential for an agreement to phase them out.

The process was fractious. Some parties argued that the Montreal Protocol could not be extended to cover substances that were not ozone-depleting. Others pointed to a clause in the preamble to the protocol that would allow HFCs to be covered.

This was a practical view, but perhaps it also contained an element of guilt: “we created the problem so it’s up to us to fix it”.

Resistance came from developing countries that were struggling financially to achieve the phase-out of HCFCs and did not want the expense of retooling for whatever would replace the HFCs.

In the corridors one could hear cynical voices saying that the phase-outs of CFCs and HCFCs would leave delegates and officers with nothing to do, so an extension to HFCs was needed to keep the “Montreal Club” alive.

Send in the replacements

Sensing that change was likely, the chemical industry in the US had already produced HFC replacements that are neither ozone-depleting nor global warming - the hydrofluoroolefins (HFOs).

These substances are designed to rapidly degrade in the lower atmosphere so that releases would not contribute to environmental problems. Other industrial players, strongly backed by environment groups, opted for natural refrigerants such as ammonia (already coming into widespread use in Australia), carbon dioxide (yes, the villain in new clothes!), and low-boiling hydrocarbons such as isobutane that can be “dropped in” to air-conditioners to replace the HFC R-134a.

Last week in Kigali, countries agreed to a phase-out schedule they could live with. Reductions will occur in steps: developed countries have until 2036 to reduce HFC consumption to 85% of current levels, while developing countries have until the mid-2040s. This is too slow for some observers but the experience of the last decade’s negotiations showed that measured pace would be important in securing the agreement.

Australian delegates had been involved all along in the group pushing for the extension of the Montreal Protocol to cover the HFCs. More than that, our lead delegate, Patrick McInerney (Department of the Environment) was co-chair of the working group that fashioned the Kigali consensus and enabled the 197 parties to bring the matter to conclusion.

Even the most pedantic observer, while questioning the validity of extending the Montreal Protocol, would have to agree that it was the right thing to do.

Ian Rae is was co-chair of the Chemicals Technical Options Committee and a member of the Technology and Economic Advisory Panel for the Montreal Protocol 2005-2013.

The latest Tesla/Panasonic Gigafactory will begin production of cells and modules in 2017 at the firm's acquired Buffalo site in New York.

Wind and solar may be currently leading the way in Australia’s renewable energy race, but there’s another contender lurking in the nation’s oceans.

Newcastle Council wants to build a 5MW solar farm as part of the coal port city's plans to source 30 per cent of its electricity needs from renewables by 2020.

Peru's environmental agency is investigating the deaths of some 10,000 frogs whose bodies have been found in a tributary of the Titicaca lake.

Horse chestnut trees are being attacked by a combination of pests and diseases which could cause the conker to vanish

Australia's feral cat population is estimated to be between 2.1 to 6.3 million, depending on seasonal conditions. But its impact on Australia's fauna is devastating.

The UK’s favourite new yellow submarine, Boaty McBoatface, will likely take on the grand challenge of trying to cross the entire Arctic Ocean under the ice.

A family of rare white squirrels are living in a suburb of Edinburgh.

Australia has some of the world's best ocean energy resources. Wave image from www.shutterstock.com

Wind and solar may be currently leading the way in Australia’s renewable energy race, but there’s another contender lurking in the nation’s oceans.

Australia arguably possesses the world’s largest wave energy resource, around 1,800 terawatt hours. Most of this is concentrated in the southern half of the continent, between Geraldton and Brisbane. To put this in context, Australia used 248 terawatt hours of electricity in 2013-14.

Waves aren’t the only renewable power source in our oceans. The daily movements of the tides shift vast amounts of water around the Australian coast, and technology for conversion of tidal energy to electricity is more mature than any wave converters.

Ocean renewable energy also spans ocean thermal energy conversion, and energy captured from our large ocean currents (such as the East Australian Current). These represent less mature technologies with less opportunity in Australia.

Australia has abundant energy resources – both renewables and fossil fuels. So what will it take to get ocean energy out of the water, and into our homes?

The task at hand

The Paris Agreement, to which Australia is a signatory, aims to limit global warming to well-below 2℃. This will require almost complete decarbonisation of global electricity systems by 2050.

Of the 248 terawatt hours of electricity used in Australia, around 17 terawatt hours of this came from large scale renewable energy technology, equivalent to about half of Australia’s Renewable Energy Target of 33 terawatt hours by 2020.

To keep us on track to meet our international commitments, members of Australia’s Climate Change Authority recently proposed a target of 65% by 2030. This would require a rapid, large scale transition to alternative emission-free energy systems.

Wind and solar are currently leading the way, but we’ll need other technologies. This is not only to boost low emissions energy supply, but also to overcome the problem of intermittency due to the natural variability of the energy sources (when the sun doesn’t shine, or when the wind doesn’t blow).

Out to sea

Ocean renewable energy technologies (including wave and tidal) are emerging as a future contributor to Australia’s energy mix, and have a number of advantages over other sources.

Both wave and tidal energy devices are deployed offshore (not taking up limited land space) and are typically out of sight (deployed under the surface, or sufficiently offshore and low profile to not be obvious to the casual observer).

Although ocean energy resources also vary day-to-day like wind and solar, wave power has only a third of the variability of wind power. It can also be forecast three-times further ahead than wind. Tidal energy is predictable over very long time-frames.

These attributes provide an advantage in a portfolio of clean energy technologies and have led to notable government and other investments in ocean renewable energy technologies in Australia.

Ocean energy in Australia

The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) has contributed more than A$44.3 million to at least nine ocean renewable energy projects to date (two closed before completion owing to technical and financial challenges). With other funds, more than A$122 million has been invested in ocean energy in Australia.

These funds have supported demonstration projects, including notable international successes (Carnegie Wave Energy Ltd, and BioPower Systems), and other research. Several other demonstration projects have also been undertaken in recent years by start-up companies with self-funded support, and unique technologies.

The expected installed capacity from approved ocean projects in Australia is around 3.5 megawatts. So far total global installed capacity of wave energy projects is less than 5 megawatts. The EU has also been a major investor in wave energy projects, with approximately €185 million (around A$275 million) invested to date, for a total expected installed capacity of 26 megawatts by 2018.

Although tidal energy converters are the most ready of ocean renewables, a high-quality assessment of Australia’s national tidal energy resource is yet to be done.

Nevertheless several prospective sites in northern Australia and near Tasmania are attracting national and international attention for potential development owing to their attractive resource. Significant projects are in development, particularly in Europe, where tidal installed capacity is set to increase to about 57 megawatts by 2018.

Falling costs

At the moment, the lifetime costs of ocean energy technologies are high. Until there are more than 10 megawatts of wave energy installed globally, costs will remain around A$500-900 per megawatt hour.

By comparison, in 1981, when there were less than 10 megawatts of installed wind energy capacity, wind turbines cost around A$720 per megawatt hour. In 1990 there were 2 gigawatts, and costs fell to around A$190 per megawatt hour. Now there are around 500 gigawatts of installed wind energy, and the cost of onshore wind is around A$110 per megawatt hour, similar to coal.

This experience suggests that costs for wave energy will decrease to A$170-340 per megawatt hour when installed capacity reaches 2 gigawatts. But costs should not be the only performance indicator for ocean renewables.

Options are being explored to combine and integrate design of other infrastructure (such as wave energy capture as a coastal protection mechanism, powering offshore aquaculture, or recreational amenities) which will reduce relative costs.

Support for an emerging industry

To put ocean energy generators in our seas, planners, operators and financiers will increasingly require more knowledge of how much energy is available and where.

These decision-makers also need to understand barriers or constraints to ocean energy (in particular areas such as access to transmission infrastructure, or other uses of the sea such as fishing, aquaculture, tourism, shipping, ports, marine-protected areas).

To help answer these questions, ARENA and CSIRO have developed the Australian Wave Energy Atlas. The atlas provides wave energy resource information together with details of available electricity infrastructure and spatial constraints for deployment. This allows users to identify the most viable sites for future wave energy projects, and ultimately ease the process of attracting capital and negotiating the consenting process.

While ocean renewable energy has many attractive features, there are still many challenges. The advantages of consistency and predictability of ocean energy become diminished if costs don’t fall below those of wind or solar supplemented with storage, which will offer the same advantages.

Other challenges include the technological advances needed to make generation devices ready and reduce costs; policy and regulatory barriers to project development; lack of awareness of ocean renewables and the potential they provide; limited body of knowledge on the environmental effects of large scale deployments; and the finance mechanisms to support the growing industry.

To overcome these challenges we’ll need to bring decision-makers, researchers, manufacturers, and businesses together to unlock the potential of our oceans.

The Australian Ocean Renewable Energy Symposium, running from today until October 20.

Mark Hemer receives funding from the Commonwealth of Australia Australian Renewable Energy Agency, via the Australian Wave Energy Project, and the Department of the Energy and Environment National Environmental Science Program.

Irene Penesis works for the Australian Maritime College, specialist institute of the University of Tasmania. She receives funding from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency via the 'Australian Wave Energy' project and 'Australian capability in arrays of ocean wave-power machines' project. Irene has also received grant funding from the Australian Research Council Linkage Program..In addition, performs research consulting with Australian wave energy and tidal energy device developers via AMC Search Ltd.

Kathleen McInnes receives funding from the Commonwealth of Australia Australian Renewable Energy Agency, via the Australian Wave Energy Project, and the Department of the Energy and Environment National Environmental Science Program.

Richard Manasseh works for Swinburne University of Technology which leads a project funded by the Commonwealth of Australia's Australian Renewable Energy Agency, 'Towards an Australian capability in arrays of ocean wave-power machines'.

Tracey Pitman receives funding from the Commonwealth of Australia Australian Renewable Energy Agency, via the Australian Wave Energy Project.

Queensland's got a long way to go to meet its renewable target. Solar image from www.shutterstock.com

In the wake of South Australia’s state-wide blackout, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull urged states to avoid “extremely aggressive and extremely unrealistic” renewable energy targets.

In the midst of this discussion, the Queensland government released a draft report from an expert panel on its renewables target of 50% by 2030. Currently around 7% of the state’s electricity comes from renewable sources.

After South Australia’s misfortunes with its electricity system over the past few months, including price spikes and blackouts, some would say this was an inopportune time to be discussing aspirational renewable energy targets.

But the report provides a welcome discussion about how states can achieve their targets, without the politics and ideology. The panel consulted widely, and commissioned detailed modelling on potential credible pathways for Queensland to meet its target, as well as the economic consequences of those pathways.

Renewables at minimal cost

The cost and impact of any renewable target depends on many factors: the technology mix, how the target is met, the degree of government intervention (or assistance), the regulatory framework, and of course the demand for the electricity produced.

The analysis in the Queensland report attempts to answer a “simple” question: how do you achieve a 50% target at the lowest cost with the least impact on energy security and the maximum benefit to the state bottom line?

The pathways examined by the panel delivered the following outcomes:

• on average, no net impact on household electricity prices

• a private-sector-driven investment of around A$6bn in the state

• a required “subsidy” of around A$1bn over the 14 years of the policies

• no forced retirement of coal-fired generation in Queensland

• around 6,500 full-time equivalent jobs per year

• between 4,000 and 5,500 megawatts of new generation will be required after 2020 to meet a 50% target, based on typical wind and solar capacity factors

• around 14,000 megawatt hours of renewables in the Queensland electricity system by 2030 with system security maintained by coal power stations.

But there are many questions remaining, and these are the questions that many in Canberra are pondering.

How to meet the target

The panel proposed a market mechanism known as a “reverse auction contract for difference” (CFD), similar to that employed recently in the Australian Capital Territory for its renewable target. Reverse auction CFDs are gathering momentum in energy markets around the world.

The basic idea is this: in an open auction, bids are accepted from investors to provide a specific amount of electricity at a pre-defined price (say for instance 100MW at A$80 per MWh for 15 years). The contracting entity (be it government or private) will contract the lowest bid, and then subsidise the winning bid with the “difference” between the bid price and the market value (in this case the National Electricity Market wholesale price).

The investor with the winning bid builds the plant and delivers the electricity. The “difference” may be positive, which ensures that the contracting entity gets paid a subsidy. The subsidy is then passed through to the consumer and the contracting entity underwrites the long term risk.

These mechanisms are a well-accepted tool for pricing and accounting for long-term risk.

The modelling done for the expert panel finds that increased competition and cheap power generation in Queensland’s energy mix will put downward pressure on wholesale prices. With a subsidy counteracted by lower wholesale prices, there is unlikely to be an increase in electricity prices from electricity generation.

Coal power still needed

The modelling found that because the Queensland’s coal power station are relatively efficient and profitable they will remain viable at lower output and continue to provide critical baseload and ancillary services.

A lack of critical baseload and ancillary services contributed to price spikes in South Australia recently.

With a robust transmission grid and interconnection with New South Wales, the Queensland transmission system is also better placed for a high proportion of renewables in the mix.

Joining up the dots

While states are going it alone, nationally Australia is also aiming to increase renewable energy to 33,000 gigawatt hours by 2020 under the Renewable Energy Target.

The Queensland report recommendations include measures to facilitate integration with federal policy, including:

• reverse auctions in 2017-18 to increase the delivery of renewables in Queensland to meet the national Renewable Energy Target by 2020

• engagement in the development of integrated climate and energy policy at the national level

• developing a flexible and adaptable Queensland RET to facilitate integration with the national scheme

• engagement with the Australian Energy Market Operator to assist with policy development.

There is little in the report to suggest any trade-off between federal and state goals.

For the last 15 years, Germany’s mature approach to renewable energy took it from 6% to 31% renewable energy in its electricity generation. In doing so, it created a renewable energy industry that employs 355,000 people. Electricity prices have increased but that is because Germany, as an early adopter, has subsidised the rest of the world’s low-cost solar panels and wind turbines.

PriceWaterhouse Coopers found in 2015 that 92% of Germans continue to support the rollout of renewable energy. This “aggressive” rollout has not impacted the reliability of the German grid. Germans experienced an estimated 12.28 minutes of outage in 2014. This figure has improved since the arrival of renewables, and indicates higher reliability than neighbouring countries.

For coal-dependent Queensland, customers experienced an average of 243.44 minutes of outage in 2014. Comparisons between Queensland and Germany are not meaningful, but Germany’s reliability statistics suggest that claims of reduced reliability as a result of high levels of renewable energy really need to be backed up by facts, not fear.

What is clear though, as pointed out almost laboriously throughout Queensland’s report, is a need for national leadership, co-ordination, and simple joined-up thinking.

The Australian public largely supports the rollout of renewable energy, so it is up to politicians to find a way to deliver.

Lynette Molyneaux does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.

A Humpback whale calf got stuck in shark nets off the Gold Coast in Australia.

The construction of the UK's £200m polar research ship, the RRS Sir David Attenborough has formally begun at the Cammel Laird Shipyard in Birkenhead.

Scientists create the highest plasma pressure ever recorded with the Alcator C-Mod reactor in a breakthrough for clean energy technology

A nuclear fusion world record has been set in the US, marking another step on the long road towards the unlocking of limitless clean energy.

A team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) created the highest plasma pressure ever recorded, using its Alcator C-Mod tokamak reactor. High pressures and extreme temperatures are vital in forcing atoms together to release huge amounts of energy.

Continue reading...

A lack of urgency and failure to tackle illegal levels of nitrogen dioxide is why ClientEarth is taking the UK government back to court this week

No less than 17 years have passed since new rules were approved in the UK to save thousands of lives by limiting deadly air pollution in our towns and cities.

Pollution is the “invisible killer” because, for the most part, it goes unseen. Its impact on human health and the planet is why those laws were necessary.

Continue reading...