Renewable Energy News

Posted by: CeeBee

Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 08:52



Sainsbury’s UK solar rollout makes it UK’s largest rooftop PV operator

Sainsbury’s has become the largest operator of rooftop-mounted solar PV across the UK after installing 16MW of capacity on 169 of its stores.

The 69,500 solar modules installed across the supermarket giant’s stores will reduce Sainsbury’s carbon footprint by 6,800 tonnes of CO2 every year as well as significantly slashing the company’s utility bills.

The mass rollout of solar serves as part of Sainsbury’s ambitious corporate target that aims to reduce its operational carbon emissions by 30 percent absolute and 65 percent relative by 2020. The company also holds a wider ambition to cut its carbon footprint in half by 2030.

Justin King, Chief Executive of Sainsbury’s said: "We’ve already made real progress towards achieving our environmental commitments detailed in our stretching ‘20 by 20 Sustainability Plan’. This solar rollout is another big step forward. It makes sense for us – it’s good for the environment and for our business and we are actively looking to install more panels.

“We already produce far more solar power than most commercial solar farms. We believe the retail sector should take another look at solar energy as a viable way to reduce its impact on the environment. Supermarkets have the equivalent of football fields on their roofs, many of them underutilised. It’s a perfect time to turn that space into something positive.

“Big contracts like this support job creation in the renewable energy sector and are essential for our solar industry to thrive. We believe that we’ll see the cost of solar energy reaching parity with the grid on commercial installations like this in the next two and four years, and that may well herald a new boom in the solar industry.”

The supermarket giant is truly embracing the use of renewables, in addition to the solar rollout, Sainsbury’s has installed over 40 biomass boilers as well as committed to installing geo-thermal heat pumps at 100 of its stores nationwide. Welcoming the news, Friends of the Earth Director of Policy and Campaigns, Craig Bennett, said: “This major solar investment will make Sainsbury’s a greener grocer and gives a significant boost to the UK’s renewable energy sector.

“Firms across the UK are waking up to the business benefits of using clean British energy from the sun, wind and waves to reduce our reliance on increasingly expensive fossil fuels. It’s little surprise that 85 per cent of the public want us to ditch fossil fuels in favour of renewable energy – this will bring down bills in the long term and create new UK industries and jobs.”

In the run up to the controversial August cuts, deployment of commercial scale solar has been disappointing. However, Justin King’s public backing of large scale solar as good for the environment and business should help instil some confidence to the UK solar market, which has had to endure significant changes to the feed-in tariff scheme in recent days. This year’s upcoming Solar Power UK conference will be addressing how companies can utilise solar to help cut costs today whilst ensuring a saving on fixed costs in the future. The Birmingham-based event will be running a wide range of seminar topics from October 2-4.

http://www.solarpowerportal.co.uk/news/s...v_operator_2356
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 08:56


Sumitomo invests in giant US solar project

Japan's Sumitomo Corp on Tuesday said it would take a 25 per cent stake in a 550-megawatt solar power project in California, giving the trading house a foothold in the growing US solar industry.

Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

The company, which has stakes in four US wind projects, joins GE Energy Financial Services and NextEra Energy Resources as an investor in the Desert Sunlight solar farm located in Riverside County.

Sumitomo made its investment by buying a part of GE's stake, it said in a statement.

The photovoltaic solar project is being built by First Solar Inc and has agreements in place to provide power to California utilities Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. It is expected to be fully operational by 2015, according to First Solar's website.

Last year the US Department of Energy agreed to back part of $US1.46 billion in loans for the Desert Sunlight project as part of its program to aid alternative energy development.

Sumitomo said it will continue to seek opportunities to invest in solar and other renewable energy projects in the United States and Canada. The company has also made investments in US fossil fuel assets. In August it said it would take a 30 per cent stake in shale acreage controlled by Devon Energy Corp in the Permian Basin in Texas in a $US1.4 billion deal.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climat...l#ixzz28BYzhURE
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 09:01

Americans Love Solar (Republicans, Democrats, & Independents) — More than Any Other Energy Source

Everyone loves solar. Well, ok, not everyone, but the HUGE majority of people. It’s been like this probably as long as the idea of solar power has been around.

Now, a new study conducted by Hart Research on behalf of the Solar Energy Industries Association, shows that Americans of all stripes are still fully in love with solar.

Here are the bullet points:

92 percent of voters believe it’s important for the US to develop and use more solar energy.
85 percent of voters view solar energy favorably (60 percent very favorable).
78 percent of voters say government should support growth of solar energy with incentives.

This is the 5th year in a row that the survey has been conducted, and it’s the 5th time solar has been the popular kid on the block. As stated above, even Republicans (voters, not Congresspeople, that is) love solar:

“The poll found that more than nine out of 10 (92 percent) of likely voters feel that the U.S. should develop and use more solar energy. This support was strong across the political spectrum with 84 percent of Republicans, 95 percent of independents, and 98 percent of Democrats agreeing.”

If there’s one issue worth supporting loud and clear and basing an election on, its clean energy, and especially solar. Clearly, that’s not what the Romney/Ryan ticket is doing, and even the Obama administration isn’t being very clear about it. Obama’s energy message is all about “all of the above” — I wonder how much more popular he might be if he went on a really strong clean energy push with a focus on solar?

Geoff Garin, president of Hart Research Associates, says: “These results clearly show that American voters across the political spectrum have a strong favorable view of solar energy and the solar industry, and they believe that government has an important role to play in allowing this industry to grow and succeed.”

“The consistency of these findings is also impressive,” said Molly O’Rourke, partner at Hart Research. “Voters express the same high levels of support across a variety of measures, from their very positive perceptions of solar energy to their enthusiasm for policies that promote greater use of solar.”

And these weren’t just general or non-competitive questions! Take a load of these stats:

“Voters’ favorable view of solar translates directly into widespread bipartisan support for federal incentives fostering solar energy. Nearly four out of five (78 percent) of voters say the government should provide tax credits and financial incentives to encourage the development and use of solar energy. Fully two-thirds of swing voters (67 percent) chose solar above any other energy source to receive tax and financial incentives.”

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/10/02/amer...-energy-source/
Posted by: bundybear

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 11:09

I find the above hard to comprehend since I belong to a huge forum with mostly American users. Most of them don't even have a clothes line because they say there isn't enough good weather to dry clothes with so how can they use solar?
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 11:30

The folks in your forum must all be up in the North of Alaska then as the US has massive areas of desert that house huge solar farms which receive massive amounts of sunlight per year...

Solar power in the United States

Solar power in the United States includes utility-scale solar power plants as well as local distributed generation, mostly from rooftop photovoltaics.

The largest solar power installation in the world is the Solar Energy Generating Systems facility in California, which has a total capacity of 354 megawatts (MW).

Nevada Solar One is a solar thermal plant with a 64 MW generating capacity, located near Boulder City, Nevada.

The Copper Mountain Solar Facility is a 48 MW photovoltaic solar power facility in Boulder City.

The 37 MW Long Island Solar Farm in Upton, New York is the largest photovoltaic array in the eastern U.S.

The DeSoto Next Generation Solar Energy Center is a 25 MW photovoltaic solar power facility in DeSoto County, Florida.

The Desert Sunlight Solar Farm is a 550 MW solar power plant under construction in Riverside County, California, that will use thin-film solar photovoltaic modules.

The Topaz Solar Farm is a 550 MW photovoltaic power plant, being built in San Luis Obispo County, California.

The Blythe Solar Power Project is a 500 MW photovoltaic power station under construction in Riverside County, California.

The Ivanpah Solar Power Facility is a 392 MW solar thermal power facility which is under construction in south-eastern California.

The Solana Generating Station is a 280 MW solar power plant which is under construction about 70 miles (110 km) southwest of Phoenix, Arizona.

The Agua Caliente Solar Project is a 397 megawatt photovoltaic solar generating facility being built in Yuma County, Arizona.

The California Valley Solar Ranch (CVSR) is a 250 megawatt (MW) solar photovoltaic power plant, which is being built by SunPower in the Carrizo Plain, northeast of California Valley.

There are plans to build many other large solar plants in the United States. Governor Jerry Brown has signed legislation requiring California's utilities to obtain 33 percent of their electricity from renewable energy sources by the end of 2020.

A total of 4,658 MW of utility scale solar power plants are under construction and an additional 25,370 MW are under development, with 15,802 MW of those in California.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_in_the_United_States
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/10/2012 11:42

Originally Posted By: bundybear
I find the above hard to comprehend since I belong to a huge forum with mostly American users. Most of them don't even have a clothes line because they say there isn't enough good weather to dry clothes with so how can they use solar?

I find the results of that study hard to believe as well. The statistics given make me question how well the research was conducted.
At face-value, solar and wind are fairly likeable options. However, all because something is likeable, does not mean that option should be pursued. Solar and wind are both rather inefficient and expensive, and will never be the main source of power globally. Of course, government's across the globe could always heavily subsidise solar panels to the public. I'm sure SEIA would be very happy with that. wink
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/10/2012 08:45


Epuron Acquires Australia's Largest Tracking Solar Power Plant from SunPower

Commonwealth Bank Finances Purchase, Becomes Country's First Financial Institution to Invest in Large-Scale Solar Project

SunPower Corp and Epuron today announced that Epuron has acquired the 1-megawatt Uterne solar power plant operating in Alice Springs, Australia. Commonwealth Bank, Australia's leading provider of integrated financial services, has provided project financing, making it the country's first major bank to support a solar project of this size.

The project was developed by SunPower with the support of Power and Water Corporation. Under a solar power purchase agreement, Power and Water Corporation will buy generated electricity at a guaranteed rate over a 20-year term. Following the acquisition, SunPower will continue to provide operations and maintenance services in conjunction with Ogden Power, a SunPower accredited solar company based in Alice Springs.

"Epuron's acquisition of Uterne underscores the bankability of SunPower's industry-leading, high efficiency technology, decades of proven experience and more than 2,500 megawatts deployed globally," said Howard Wenger, SunPower president, regions. "This solar power plant has exceeded reliability and energy production expectations since it was commissioned in June 2011, and will reliably generate power and return on investment for the life of the system."

"The acquisition of Uterne further demonstrates Epuron's commitment to a growing solar portfolio in the Northern Territory," said Epuron Executive Director Andrew Durran. "The project is a great addition to our 1-megawatt remote TKLN Solar project, making Epuron one of the largest solar project owners and asset managers in Australia. Epuron is especially pleased to be able to project finance the acquisition through CBA, a first for a project of this size in Australia."

Uterne is comprised of high efficiency SunPower solar panels installed on the SunPower® T20 Tracker, which positions panels to follow the sun during the day, increasing daily energy production by up to 30 percent over conventional fixed-tilt installations. In August 2012, Uterne received an Engineering Excellence Award from the Institution of Engineers Australia.
The development of Uterne was made possible with funding assistance from the Australian Government as part of its Solar Cities program. The solar power plant is a key component of the Alice Solar City program and illustrates the initiative's success in developing more sustainable energy solutions in Australia.

About SunPower

SunPower Corp designs, manufactures and delivers the highest efficiency, highest reliability solar panels and systems available today. Residential, business, government and utility customers rely on the company's quarter century of experience and guaranteed performance to provide maximum return on investment throughout the life of the solar system. Headquartered in San Jose, Calif., SunPower has offices in North America, Europe, Australia, Africa and Asia. For more information, visit www.sunpowercorp.com.

About Epuron

Founded in 2003, Epuron is a leading Australian renewable energy company with a focus on development of utility-scale wind and solar energy projects. Epuron's TKLN Solar project in the Northern Territory is ready to supply three remote communities in Australia's outback. Epuron is also one of Australia's most successful wind farm developers. It has developed the highest yielding, largest, and largest number of wind farms in NSW. Epuron is working with both mining and utility clients to provide reliable, off-grid power using solar and wind energy to supplement diesel or gas power supplies. For more information, visit www.epuron.com.au.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/2012/10/03/4879254/epuron-acquires-australias-largest.html#storylink=cpy
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/10/2012 08:54

KYOCERA Establishes New Company to Operate 70MW Solar Power Plant in Japan

Kyocera Corporation (President: Tetsuo Kuba), along with six other companies, today announced the completion of capital investment procedures for the establishment of Kagoshima Mega Solar Power Corporation, a new company which will be tasked with operating a 70 megawatt (MW) solar power plant in southern Japan. The utility-scale solar power plant will become the largest in Japan.

The new company will develop and operate the previously announced 70MW solar power plant in Kagoshima City (Kagoshima Prefecture) on land owned by IHI Corporation — with the power generated to be purchased by Kyushu Electric Power Co., Inc. under the guidelines of the new feed-in tariff (FIT) program which was implemented on July 1 in Japan. The total project cost is estimated at approximately 27 billion yen (approx. 345 million US dollars*2), with seven investment companies involved (including Kyocera), and Mizuho Corporate Bank, Ltd. set to devise a financing plan for the project. Construction is set to commence in September of this year, with plans for completion by fall of 2013.



Annual output Approx. 78,800MWh (projected)

Electricity generated will provide the equivalent power for roughly 22,000 average households, and will help to offset roughly 25,000 tons of CO2 per year.

http://global.kyocera.com/news/2012/0706_ssll.html

Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/10/2012 07:26


'Frozen air' could heat up renewable energy

The journey to a cooler, greener planet may start with a breath of fresh air, suggests a battery technology under development that could rapidly solve one of the biggest problems with wind and solar energy.

The air we breathe is about 78 percent nitrogen, a gas that turns to liquid at -321 degrees Fahrenheit.

The technology from Highview Power Storage in the United Kingdom involves extracting carbon dioxide and water vapor from the air, chilling the nitrogen to its liquid state and storing it in a giant vacuum flask.

Then, when energy is needed, the liquid is warmed to ambient temperature. As it transition to the gas phase, it expands about 700 times, generating force to drive a turbine that generates electricity.

Wind and solar power are used to suck air into compressors, purify it and freeze it, which gets us over the hurdle of the intermittentcy problem of the renewable energy.

Studies have shown time and again there’s more than enough wind and solar energy available to power the world, we just need to harness it and store it so that we can use it when and where we need it instead of only when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing.

Researchers around the world are chasing a range of technologies to overcome the hurdle, such as the liquid batteries under development by Donald Sadoway at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Current battery technologies are more energy efficient than liquid nitrogen storage, noted Stuart Nelmes, an engineer with High Power Storage, told the BBC’s Energy Live News.

But the liquid nitrogen technology is more mature, scalable and adaptable to today’s electricity grid, he added, which makes the cool tech an attractive solution to a big green tech problem.

A pilot project is up and running outside of London and the company signed a commercial agreement with a German firm to develop plants in Africa, according to Discovery News.

http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/futureoftech/frozen-air-could-heat-renewable-energy-6283746
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/10/2012 09:10

Studies prove that there is more than enough wind and solar to power the world, except that it doesn't bloody work. Look I would be the first bloke on the planet to jump into wind and solar power if it could produce constant reliable results day in day out without the need for any backups from normal power generation but it fails on so many levels that it is a joke and is the reason why major countries around the world are dumping 'renewable' subsidies left, right and centre and going back to traditional coal fired power generation.

As to the pipe dream posted above what are the energy requirements to cool the nitrogen? Is is a positive amount (less energy required to recool than is produced by the expansion), a neutral amount or as I suspect a huge deficit due to more energy being required to constantly cool the nitrogen than can ever be produced by the expansion.

Originally Posted By: cb
Wind and solar power are used to suck air into compressors, purify it and freeze it, which gets us over the hurdle of the intermittentcy problem of the renewable energy.
Except it won't when there is no wind and there is no sun so thats another pipe dream shattered by reality, but hey it could work, in theory. So in the end we end up with another huge white elephant that costs a bomb to build and run and doesn't do anything like what it was designed to do.
Posted by: Moonstruck

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/10/2012 09:51

(quote] Except it won't when there is no wind and there is no sun so thats another pipe dream shattered by reality, but hey it could work, in theory. So in the end we end up with another huge white elephant that costs a bomb to build and run and doesn't do anything like what it was designed to do.

[/quote]


SBT I thinks its called evolution, it started with a rock that rolled, then came the wheel and before you know it man has invented the car. Ideas/theories need to be put into practice so the they can evolve into a practical working solution to a problem or need, the downsideis that sometimes it seems to take a very long time and a lot of wasted money before that solution is found.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/10/2012 10:30

Wet-ish I am not knocking progress or the method, just the practicality of it.

The problem with all these schemes is that huge amounts are expended on the trialing for little if any return.

Now as a layman if I can see the flaws in the process by reading 1 article how certain can anyone be of it atcually working?

By all means have a trial, see what the pitfalls are but don't hype this as a cure for the issues of green power because it patently isn't as it relies on two failed processes (solar and wind - and no doubt has to be backed up by conventional power like every other green power initative) to make a 3rd one work.

By adding failed processes to the start of any process you can only ever end up with a failure.

I embrace new technology with gusto - well thats not entirely true, I won't buy anything Apple related for example - but I will reject anything that defies the law of diminishing returns. i.e. electric cars, home solar panels and wind turbines feeding into the grid etc.

Solar and wind have their places like at our nieces cattle station where it is used as the main but not sole power source, they still have access to mains power when it fails (4 days of no wind and overcast weather means battery storage is exhausted) and for some power hungry applications (arc welding, cold rooms etc) they have to use mains power.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/10/2012 08:41


It's a myth that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions

Conclusive figures show that the sceptics who lobby against wind power simply have their facts wrong

The assertion that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions is a myth, according to conclusive statistical data obtained from National Grid and analysed here in the Guardian for the first time. With a new wind generation record of 4,131 megawatts set on 14 September, the question of how far the UK's wind generation fleet can help in meeting our climate targets is increasingly controversial. Now it can be shown that the sceptics who lobby against wind simply have their facts wrong.

On 14 September, wind turbines connected to the National Grid produced over 80 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity, just over 10% of total UK generation. This was far from being a one-off: with more than 4,000 turbines both on and offshore now connected to the grid, wind produced 48 GWh of usable electricity per day on average during September, adding up to about 6% of overall daily national electricity requirement. On many days, wind is now the fourth-largest source of UK electricity, after coal, nuclear and gas. Indeed, this figure is a significant underestimate, because about two gigawatts of wind are connected directly to local networks and so not directly visible to National Grid.

Read full article
Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/10/2012 09:37


The actual report says wind saved 5.5 Million tonnes CO2 in the UK in 2011 (the report did not include a full costing model including the emissions occuring as a result of the materials used and lifetimes etc. but nonetheless).

UK's total emissions in 2011 were 549 MT CO2 so a savings of 1.0%. Only 49% more to go.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/10/2012 15:59


Solar panel take-up warms to a million

Australian roofs now have a solar power generating capacity equivalent to half the Snowy Hydro scheme as consumers react to soaring power prices and sinking prices for photovoltaic (PV) panels.

Some 858,000 homes have solar PV panels with an installed capacity of just under 2 gigawatts, according to the latest data from the Australian Clean Energy Regulator (ACER). At the current rate of take-up, the millionth home will tap into solar power before the end of June next year, said Professor Ray Wills, chief adviser to the Sustainable Energy Association (SEA), an industry lobby group.

Significantly, the growth in demand for solar has largely weathered the slashing of generous feed-in tariff in 2011 — and subsequent dive in orders after the loss of the subsidy — to recover much of its expansion pace.

Intense international competition among suppliers, particularly from China, now means households can expect payback periods of as short as four years, with a typical 1500-kilowatt unit selling for $1500-$2000, Professor Wills said.


Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business...l#ixzz29FKldmXu
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/10/2012 17:07

And all the rest have to subsidise them!
Posted by: adon

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/10/2012 08:52

1500 kilowatt for $1500-2000???? Tell em they're dreamin! That would be a 1.5kW. I think that solar hot water should be subsidised and encouraged for every home but PV cells maybe not.

I don't see PV cells as big of a problem as wind farms. They use space already occupied by a roof, they are small scale(roof top scale) and do not ruin scenic landscapes. Also if one breaks down, there is not a huge drop in capacity.

I do see though that the above story quotes installed capacity and not actual supply. Would be a fair gap between the 2 figures.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 14:08

Work begins on new SA wind farm

WORK has begun on the second stage of the Snowtown wind farm project in South Australia's mid-north.

The $439 million development will include 90 turbines and have the capacity to power 180,000 homes.

"This project will add considerable capacity within South Australia to generate clean, green power from renewable sources," Industrial Relations Minister Russell Wortley said on Thursday after turning the first sod.

"South Australia is increasingly recognised as a leader in renewable energy.

"If we were a country, we would be second in the world when it comes to generating power through renewable technology."

The minister said ongoing investment in renewable energy would, in the long-term, put downward pressure on electricity prices and ensure South Australia was playing its part in tackling global climate change.

The state is currently working towards having 33 per cent of its energy come from renewable sources by 2020.


Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/nat...4#ixzz2AHCqYtWX

Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 15:38

The environmental visual pollution in SA by these horrible looking masses of things is something shocking!!!
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 15:45

I actually quite like the look of them spinning away on the hill tops and coasts. They engender in me a feeling of serenity and calmness. Chimney stacks spewing out pollution does the opposite funnily enough...
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 15:57

I did not see any sm0kestacks in the huge area that now has shocking visual pollution, killing birds, noise annoying folk and making them move, because they can't stand the effects. How can environmentalists not go against them, besides the subsidies needed to keep them going!!!
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 16:34

Lets have a look at what actually comes out of those "chimney stacks spewing out pollution".

What are the facts on coal combustion?

When we burn any carbon fuel such as coal, oil, wood, gas, grass, candle sticks, cardboard or cow manure, it produces several gases. Burning a typical Australian thermal coal in air would produce mainly nitrogen (68%), carbon dioxide (21%), water vapour (7%), oxygen (1%), argon (1%) and ash (2%).

So 98% by weight of coal combustion products (the first five) are natural gases merely being recycled to the atmosphere from whence they came. None are toxic. All are invisible except for water vapour.

It is true that some coals when burnt can produce some SOX (oxides of sulphur) and NOX (oxides of nitrogen) but these are caught in modern filters and cleaners. Only small traces enter the air. They could be annoying, and would be dangerous if concentrated in city air, but EVERY normal component of coal is an essential plant nutrient, and far from being invariably toxic, is often in short supply in the broader environment. Anyone who raises crops or animals often needs to supplement soils, pastures or animal feeds with nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, copper, zinc and selenium to name a few.

The few coal combustion products that are genuinely toxic in most concentrations, such as mercury or cadmium, occur rarely and in tiny quantities. If present, special filters are used to ensure they are not released from power stations. Australian coals are generally very low in mercury, indeed lower than in the average earth environment. Naturally occurring rocks containing mercury (as found at Cinnabar in Queensland), dental amalgams and the new "green" fluoro light bulbs represent a far greater mercury danger to humans.

But the main products of coal combustion, carbon dioxide and water, are not pollutants and not toxic.

Paragraph removed


The wispy white vapour is steam, from the cooling towers, as harmless as what comes out of a boiling kettle.
The tall stack is the Exhaust Stack, emitting mostly invisible harmless natural gases: – nitrogen, carbon dioxide, oxygen and argon.
They all came from the atmosphere in the first place.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 16:56


Could you please post the link to where you copied and pasted your post from snafu. It seems to have been written by Viv Forbes, who's views on coal are rather biased due to his links to mining. I'd also like the link to do some fact checking as well.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 17:00


Wind and solar make up 100% of new US power capacity in Sept

September was tied for the hottest of any September on record globally. It was also a very hot month for renewable energy in the US. According to figures from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, wind and solar accounted for all new electricity capacity added to America’s grid in September.

The projects consisted of five wind farms totaling 300 megawatts and 18 solar installations totaling 133 megawatts:



Renewable energy Analyst Kenneth Bossong initially reported on the figures.

“The remarkable expansion of renewable energy’s contribution to the nation’s electrical supply reflects continuing declines in costs, the impact of state renewable electricity standards, and the mix of tax and other incentives provided by the federal government,” said Bossong in an emailed statement.

As the chart above shows, the US has seen 4,055 MW of wind, 936 MW of solar, 340 MW of biomass, 123 MW of geothermal, 9 MW of hydro, and 3 MW of waste heat projects come online since January. This represents a 29 percent increase over the same period in 2011.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2012/wind-and-solar-make-up-100-of-new-us-power-capacity-in-sept-79895
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 17:11

Quote:
Wind and solar make up 100% of new US power capacity in Sept


The reason for this is that because of greentape, the costs of building a coal / gas powerplant is about 10X that of building it in China or India (off the top of my head so grain of salt etc) - whilst the cost of building a wind / solar plant is about 90% subsidised by the tax payer (again of the to my head).

Regardless - the green plants are not anywhere near as efficient as the conventional plants: I posted up in the other tread the list of a couple of dozen green energy failures in the US and the cost to the taxpayer. Criminal realy.

http://forum.weatherzone.com.au/ubbthrea...cam#Post1133999
Posted by: LittleDavey83

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/10/2012 22:38

Originally Posted By: CeeBee

“The remarkable expansion of renewable energy’s contribution to the nation’s electrical supply reflects continuing declines in costs, the impact of state renewable electricity standards, and the mix of tax and other incentives provided by the federal government,” said Bossong in an emailed statement.


I wonder what would be the contribution without the state and federal intervention in the market? With a 'level' playing field?
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 00:24

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Could you please post the link to where you copied and pasted your post from snafu. It seems to have been written by Viv Forbes, who's views on coal are rather biased due to his links to mining. I'd also like the link to do some fact checking as well.

Here are two articles by Forbes:

Is Coal Dirty?

The Ins and Outs of Coal Fired Power Generation

My comment was taken from the first link.

In reply to your quote, "who's views on coal are rather biased due to his links to mining"

So what?

Who else would you like tell you the by-products of burning coal - Iain Hewitson from 'Huey's Cooking Adventures'? Sorry, but 'google' only returned recipes for 'Huey'.

Viv Forbes won an Open Scholarship to the University of Queensland and obtained a degree in Applied Science. Since graduation he has studied economics, politics, climatology and financial analysis.

He has spent his life working in exploration, mining, farming, infrastructure, financial analysis and political commentary. He has worked for government departments, private companies and now works as a private contractor and farmer.

He was awarded the "Australian Adam Smith Award for Services to the Free Society" in 1988, and has written widely on political, technical and economic subjects.



'Pot calling the kettle black' I think.

Al Gore, made $500,000+ profits from mining royalties, specifically the mining of zinc adjacent to his property that he leased in Tennessee, which has released millions of pounds of potentially toxic substances into the environment. The mine has been closed since 2003. Strategic Resource Acquisition was planning to re-open the mine (2007). Gore sent a letter asking the company to work with Earthworks, a national environmental group, to make sure the operation doesn’t damage the environment. "We would like for you to engage with us in a process to ensure that the mine becomes a global example of environmental best practices" - 4 years after he pocketed a cool half mil in profits from the same mine with complete disregard to the environment!

In his childhood, during the summer months he worked on the family farm in Carthage, Tennessee, where the Gores grew tobacco.

His company, which he is co-founder and chair, Generation Investment Management LLP (GIM), has huge interests and investments in renewable energy. In 2007, GIM announced a global collaboration to "find, fund and accelerate green business, technology and policy solutions with the greatest potential to help solve the current climate crisis."

He has no degree in atmospheric sciences, meteorology, physics, chemistry, biology, or climatology. Gore took two science classes as an undergraduate, scoring a "C+" in one and a "D" in the other.


So when you look at it, 'Big' Al is no different than any other pro-AGW person 'supposedly' funded by 'Big Oil/Coal/whatever', and also his interests and investments in renewable energy makes him 'rather biased'.
Posted by: Markus

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 00:59

Originally Posted By: bd bucketingdown
The environmental visual pollution in SA by these horrible looking masses of things is something shocking!!!


I'm somewhat a greeny and I agree, these things are bloody awful to look at and are everywhere, the fact that they're building more at Snowtown depresses me. If you stand on a hill near my hometown, you can see them in 3 out of the 4 points on a compass.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 01:21

What's wrong with this picture?





If you didn't guess - it's solar panels on top of a cemetery at Santa Coloma de Gramenet, outside of Barcelona, Spain.

Grave warming: Spanish town erects solar panels above coffins to combat climate change

How would you feel if your children, parents, or grand parents were buried there?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 02:34

Are some of them in shadow? I wonder for how long each day?
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 05:19

Originally Posted By: snafu
What's wrong with this picture?





If you didn't guess - it's solar panels on top of a cemetery at Santa Coloma de Gramenet, outside of Barcelona, Spain.

Grave warming: Spanish town erects solar panels above coffins to combat climate change

How would you feel if your children, parents, or grand parents were buried there?


From the article...

Quote:
The 462 panels produce power equivalent to the yearly use by 60 homes.

It will flow into the local energy grid for normal consumption and is the community's odd nod to the fight against global warming.

'The best tribute we can pay to our ancestors, whatever your religion may be, is to generate clean energy for new generations. That is our leitmotif,' said Esteve Serret, director Conste-Live Energy, a Spanish company that runs the cemetery in Santa Coloma and also works in renewable energy.


That is so touching don't you think, what a wonderful tribute to their dearly departed.


Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 07:43

"a Spanish company that runs the cemetery in Santa Coloma and also works in renewable energy."....that says it all....money making....how touching!
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 07:58

Money making is a perfectly fine pursuit in a capitalist world so I really don't see a problem there.

-----------

Renewable energy target succeeding: report

AUSTRALIA'S renewable energy target (RET) has driven $18.5 billion of investment in clean power and eroded wholesale energy prices since it was introduced a decade ago, a new report suggests.

The Clean Energy Council analysis released on Thursday finds wholesale prices are as much as $10 per megawatt hour lower as a result of the RET being in place since 2001.

The target is meant to ensure 20 per cent of Australia's electricity comes from renewable sources by 2020.

It's currently being reviewed by the Climate Change Authority amid speculation that softer demand and the popularity of rooftop solar panels means the 20 per cent target may be exceeded.

Critics say overshooting the target would unnecessarily drive up retail power bills.

But the council-commissioned report by SKM MMA states the RET is doing its job and if left unchanged will result in 12 per cent less coal-fired generation between now and 2030.

Gas-fired generation is estimated to drop 13 per cent.

"Retaining the current RET will also mean we can meet the bulk of our target for reducing carbon emissions with renewable energy projects right here in Australia," council chief executive David Green said in a statement on Thursday.

"But all this is under threat if governments succumb to pressure to tinker with or drop the renewable energy target."

Thursday's report suggests that without the RET Australia would not have met its Kyoto emission-reduction goals.

It suggests the target could deliver an extra $18.7 billion in renewable energy infrastructure by 2030, on top of the $18.5 billion already invested.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breakin...f-1226503189958
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 09:26

It is not the making money, but the way it is being made on a sensetive cemetery site! I would rather have trees and flower growing over graves sites & so would most folk I would think You want to go to Flanders and see solar panels everywhere instead of fields of poppies...not a nice look imo!

I am not against renewable energy, but those who do not have solar subsidise the few who do, and we all subsidise wind power too. make them cost efficient and put them in appropriate places not blighting the scenery please...not too much to ask is it?!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 09:40

Quote:
AUSTRALIA'S renewable energy target (RET) has driven $18.5 billion of investment in clean power and eroded wholesale energy prices since it was introduced a decade ago, a new report suggests.


And that's why we're paying the lowest ever electricity prices now... wink
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/10/2012 10:17

Yes, that is why many poorer folk have to turn off the heaters in winter lots, and go without many other appliances/lighting and food also to survive!
Because the power bills have dropped so much! (sarc)
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 31/10/2012 16:16


Scotland aims for 100% renewable energy by 2020

Scotland has set a goal of meeting half its electricity demand from renewable sources by 2015, after reaching 35 percent last year, according to Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister.

The target is an interim step in Scotland's effort to get all of its power from clean sources by 2020, after beating its 2011 goal of 31 percent, according to data from the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change.

Setting the mid-stage target will help provide energy security, environmental sustainability and employment opportunities, Salmond said today in an e-mailed statement.

“ Scotland's renewable energy production offsets our carbon emissions by 15 percent -- the equivalent of taking around 3.5 million cars off the roads,” Salmond said. “In total, 11,000 people are now employed in the renewable-energy sector.”

Scotland has as much as a quarter of Europe's tidal and offshore wind resources and about 10 percent of its wave power potential, according to the Scottish government. Offshore wind may support as many as 28,000 direct jobs by 2020, Salmond said.

link
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 31/10/2012 16:51

List of conventional and renewable power for Scotland. Yep - wave, wind and solar will definately be able to replace all these in 8 years - not.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 28/11/2012 12:06


Fanning fear: the wind farm nocebo effect

Most wind farms around the world have no history of complaints, but the few that do have seen the local area targeted by external activists who spread panic. Simon Chapman reflects on the nonsense claims of anti-wind farm activists.

Later today, the Senate will release the report of a committee into a Private Senators' Bill examining the proposal that wind turbines should not be accredited if the sound emitted exceeds 10 decibels of the background noise at any time, measured within 22 metres of a house.

The Bill was proposed by Democratic Labor Party Senator John Madigan and independent Senator Nick Xenophon. Both have form in expressing opposition to wind farms.

Like Don Quixote who tilted at windmills, Madigan previously claimed (PDF) he was fighting a "sinister" and "dangerous" industry and Xenophon believes turbines affect brain activity.

No one following the latest historical example of what is quite plainly technophobic Luddism has any doubt that the tabling will see a minority report that the proposed standard be adopted. The bill will be defeated on party lines, with the Greens supporting the Government. But it has provided a conduit for a Niagara of mostly boilerplate protest material from the tiny but highly organised opponent groups.

While the bill is purportedly about noise levels in the audible spectrum, the focus of many fear-laden submissions has been around the sub-audible low-frequency noise - infrasound - that wind turbines (and pretty much all machines) create. While studies have shown that Australians living near the coast or in cities are constantly subject to far greater 'doses' of infrasound, apparently the sort emitted by wind turbines has a special flavour that causes a never-before-seen medical condition.

Read full article
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/12/2012 12:00


U.S. Installs Record Amount Of Solar So Far In 2012: Analyst Calls It The ‘Opening Act’ For Q4 Boom

Almost exactly a year ago, during the height of the Solyndra hysteria, Mitt Romney made a rather odd statement about solar. (Yes, we’re still talking about Romney).
“When other solar companies saw Solyndra get $530 million from the government, investors pulled back in that industry,” he said. “So instead of encouraging solar development, the Obama administration hurt it.”

Actually, the statement wasn’t just odd. It was a flat out lie. In reality, the U.S. solar industry installed record amounts of solar in 2011 while bringing in nearly $2 billion in venture capital. And moving into 2012, that trend continued. In the second quarter of this year, U.S. solar installations jumped 116 percent over the same period in 2011, partly driven by large installations supported by the very loan guarantee program that Romney claimed was killing solar.

And according to Shayle Kann, vice president of research at GTM Research, that deployment was just “the opening act” for the final quarter of this year. According to a new report from GTM and the Solar Energy Industries Association, the U.S. market could see 1.2 gigawatts of solar photovoltaics installed through January, bringing 2012 installations to 3.2 gigawatts. That’s enough capacity to power about half a million average American homes.



The report shows that installers deployed 684 megawatts of projects last quarter, representing 44 percent growth over the third quarter of 2011.

The continued boom in the solar market means more jobs and better economics.

According to a census of the solar industry conducted by the Solar Foundation, the sector now employs more than 119,000 Americans — an increase of 13,872 workers over 2011.

And as more systems get deployed and businesses get more efficient, the price of solar continues to fall. According to the GTM analysis, solar PV system prices fell from $5.45 per watt to $5.21 per watt. Price declines were even greater in the utility sector, with system prices falling to $2.40 per watt — a 30 percent drop since the same period last year.

This matches historic declines in price reported by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. A recent analysis from LBNL found that U.S. residential and commercial solar PV systems fell 5 to 7 percent each year between 1998 and 2011. (Interestingly, even with these consistent drops, the installed price of solar in the U.S. is still nearly double that of Germany, which hosts a much more mature solar market).

After all the political hand-wringing about solar during the U.S. election, this report shows the industry is indeed chugging along in the U.S. While some key states may see a downturn in installs next year, America’s share of the global market continues to expand. With a 70 percent growth rate expected in 2012, the U.S. will soon represent 10 percent of the world market.

link
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/02/2013 20:45


SA's EPA rejects link between wind farms and health

For years opponents of wind farms have claimed wind turbines produce inaudible sound that affects the health of people who live close to them. But now a report by South Australia's Environmental Protection Agency says there is no link because there is no extra noise.

The Clean Energy Council says the study is more evidence that the supposed link between wind farms and health problems is a myth.

clink
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/02/2013 20:50

Presented by somebody who no doubt, doesn't live anywhere near or under a wind turbine or a wind turbine farm.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/02/2013 22:50

Originally Posted By: CeeBee

SA's EPA rejects link between wind farms and health

For years opponents of wind farms have claimed wind turbines produce inaudible sound that affects the health of people who live close to them. But now a report by South Australia's Environmental Protection Agency says there is no link because there is no extra noise.

The Clean Energy Council says the study is more evidence that the supposed link between wind farms and health problems is a myth.

clink

Well......that myth is well and truly broken and the South Aust. EPA is NOT telling all or doesn't know about it... wink

The research project that took everyone by surprise (except the residents of Waterloo)

Waterloo wind farm began operation in 2010, comprising 37 turbines.

It is located about 30 km from the town of Clare, in the heart of the South Australian wine growing and tourism region.

So in the following year when a supervisor at the University of Adelaide suggested a postgraduate student undertake a study into the impacts of turbine noise on nearby residents, it probably seemed a simple exercise.

At the time, complaints from people suffering the affects of living near wind farms were distant voices, mostly unheard outside their small, tightly-knit communities.

Dr Melissa Nursey-Bray is one of the Adelaide University’s leading academics, with a track record of extensive research into climate change.

Geography, environment and population student Zhenhua Wang drafted a questionnaire with her help. There may have been some expectation of the kind of response it would elicit. Certainly the university’s subsequent reaction would suggest so.

Seventy-five questionnaires were delivered to all local households within 5 km of the wind farm (48 were returned). Face-to-face interviews were conducted with six of the study participants.

But the results were possibly unexpected – and certainly explosive in their content.

More than 70% of the respondents claimed they had been negatively affected by the wind farm noise, with more than 50% saying they had been very or moderately negatively affected.

Health issues reported related mainly to sleep deprivation, according to the survey. But more controversially, residents also reported headaches, a possible indicator of sub-audible noise or infrasound.

Several respondents reported symptoms so extreme they bought property elsewhere.

In summary, the report said, the state’s wind farm guidelines to manage noise and protect the wellbeing of residents living near South Australia’s burgeoning wind turbine installations had failed.

In the words of the author, the survey showed a lack of clearly established integrated procedures which could be employed to tackle the local community’s complaints against the wind farm noise; a failure to utilize an independent third party to conduct valid and trustworthy noise level testing procedures; and a lack of appropriate penalties to be applied if wind developers violated the terms of the guidelines.

It was a damning indictment of both the wind farm, its compliance and a lack of adequate state government noise enforcement procedures.


And the university’s reaction, or at least that part of the university in charge of this project, was immediate.

Some Waterloo residents claim student Zhenhua Wang was instructed not to share the results of the research with them.

Requests for the research to be made public were declined by the university, or at least by academics involved with the project.


A complaint by former Waterloo resident Andreas Marciniak to the university’s ethics committee urging the data be published received this reply. In short, it stated the university could not “force” Wang to release the results of the study to members of the community.

But in email correspondence seen by STT, Marciniak responded:

“First, I must make it clear to you that I and the other participants I have spoken to only consented to participate in the survey on the clear understanding that the results would be published, provided of course that the survey project and its reporting met satisfactory standards, as they appear to have done.

“There would have been no point in participating if the results were not going to be published. Certainly the student from my discussions with him can have been under no impression other than that I and the others wanted the results published so that public misstatements by others could be corrected.”

Marciniak said the university’s research information sheet talked about how the survey was expected to help planning authorities and decision makers devise strategies better.

“How can it help anyone if the results are not published?” he asked.

“I am one of those residents driven from my home, as is my brother, and my brother-in-law.

“My brother has been instructed by his cardiologist not to go back and live in his home, and he now lives in a caravan. My sister who chooses to remain there to look after her animals is very sick. There are numerous others in the town and surrounding district who are also very sick.”


Marciniak also made several other allegations, including that Wang had been instructed not to release the research and after he gave one copy to a resident was “punished” by being told he no longer had a university job that was promised to him.

“If the material is his own, why is he being punished for giving it back to the resident?” Marciniak asked.

The university’s manager, ethics and compliance, Michelle White, emailed back saying she would “respond in due course”. Marciniak, according to local residents, heard nothing more.

Marciniak is now a Waterloo refugee, having fled the area because of health problems associated with the turbines.

Waterloo residents were gobsmacked by the university’s response.

Wind farm operator TRUenergy was also alarmed, but for another reason. They feared the report may be made public.

According to The Australian, Adelaide University deputy vice-chancellor Michael Brooks wrote to TRUenergy in response to company concerns about publication of the summary. “I have looked into this matter and found that the study in question was undertaken by a student as part of a minor thesis for his masters by coursework,” Professor Brooks said. “This was entirely the student’s own project and not undertaken for or on behalf of the university.”

Publicly, Wang said he was not willing to release results until they were peer reviewed. Privately, the student was shocked by the furor caused by his study.

Waterloo residents, however, did not let the matter rest.

Here was a study that clearly outlined the adverse health impacts they were suffering. Residents claimed they only participated on the proviso the findings would be made public. And now it was being blocked by a university bureaucracy that claimed the work belonged to the student.

Complaints and requests were met by obfuscation, they said, then silence.

So undeterred, residents decided to take matters into their own hands.

STT comment:

The ethical approval and the success with a Master’s thesis does not fit with refusal to publish the thesis results. The university’s behaviour has all the hallmarks of censorship and intimidation.

Of course Wang did not want his work released when the results caused him to be unemployed.

We understand Wang had his job offer in the Department of Climate withdrawn by Dr Nursey-Bray when she found out that he had disobeyed her instructions and given one copy of the briefing summary to one of the residents.

His dream of an academic career was shattered, through no fault of his own, for trying to do “the right thing”.

STT has been told university risk assessment lawyers became involved, and they told Wang “he was on his own” if there was any subsequent litigation as a result of his survey being released.

We believe those who have been responsible for ensuring this information was buried and withdrawing the job offer remain unaccountable and undisciplined.

The ethical issues of requiring research results to be fed back to all the participants of this research have gone unaddressed by the university authorities, despite them being made well aware of them.

Some of the residents who took part in the research, in good faith, have moved from Waterloo on the advice of their treating doctors, including a cardiologist.

By clicking here you can access the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

We refer you to section 4. It appears the university is using this to suppress the findings of Wang’s research – which is a clear conflict of interest according to the same code.

In our next post – the Waterloo farmer’s wife who wouldn’t take no for an answer.



Click the above headline (Feb. 3, 2013) for links to documentation from this study, including a copy of the university’s notice to Waterloo residents, a copy of the questionnaire, summary of the research findings and the email correspondence referred to above.


A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
- Sir Winston Churchill.


Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/02/2013 23:16

More to the article above.

Dear Premier Weatherill...

Now finally, the truth laid bare

The writer of the above letter to the SA Premier, is also writing to the SA EPA.

No doubt we will hear more about this myth.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 06:52


Just a bunch of folks blaming their typical ageing health issues on wind turbines. Their air conditioners and fridges make more noise than a turbine several km's away would do.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 08:13

A letter to the Environment Protection Authority, South Australia

It's quite long - here are some absracts (my bolding):

In one example Dr Lenchine was overheard by one resident complaining about turbine noise, Mrs Julie Quast, admitting (while setting up testing equipment at her home) that the turbine noise at her residence did not comply with the EPA guidelines: Mrs Quast swore an affidavit to that effect which was filed in the ERD Court in the matter of Quinn v AGL on 27 April 2012. Dr Lenchine, I understand, has denied making the statement. I am happy to provide you with a copy of the sworn affidavit.

In another example, Dr Lenchine prepared a report dated 2 December 2011 based on measurements taken at Mrs Quast’s residence on 16 November 2011.

Incredibly, the data was gathered only during the daytime and for a limited period of 5 hours; 8.00am to 3.00pm. How on Earth a meaningful conclusion can be reached on such a pitifully limited data set recorded during the daytime is beyond me: leading independent acoustic experts I have spoken to were gobsmacked. The most serious aspect of affected residents’ complaints concerns sleep deprivation and arousal; not likely to be an issue between 8.00am and 3.00pm. One of the problems is that the guidelines set the noise criteria as 40bBA or 5dBA above background, whichever is the greater. At night-time in quiet rural environments, like Waterloo, the background levels fall below 15dBA which means the turbine noise is permitted by the guidelines to be 25dBA above the true background levels.


============================

The guidelines were drafted by Sonus (Chris Turnbull and Jason Turner) acoustic consultants retained exclusively by wind farm developers. The base limit for the noise criteria set in the 2007 guidelines of 35dBA was increased in the 2009 guidelines (at the insistence of Sonus – acting on behalf of the developers they represent) to 40dBA. There is, and was, no scientific or other proper justification for that increase; an increase which can only be described as a gross relaxation of the noise standards, aimed at permitting wind farm developers to site ever larger and more powerful turbines even closer to rural homes.

The EPA is ready, willing and able to issue Environment Protection Orders to prevent the creation of excessive noise in all manner of industrial and domestic situations (panel beaters working too late; music venues allowing bands to play too late; lawn mowers starting too early). I read with amusement (and frustration) a Sunday Mail story a month or so ago about the EPA issuing such an order against a couple in the suburbs of Adelaide whose lovemaking antics were loud enough to annoy the neighbours. The EPA’s lack of interest and action in relation to complaints from excessive wind turbine noise can only be explained by institutional bias or, perhaps, worse.



Full letter in above link.

============================

EPA to probe wind farm noise

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) will begin monitoring low frequency noise around the Waterloo Wind Farm, in northern South Australia, later this year.

It says it will monitor noise levels for two months from the homes of residents near the wind farm in the Clare Valley.

The director of science and assessment with the EPA, Peter Dolan, says the monitoring will be used to determine if the current wind farm guidelines adequately take noise issues into account.

He says the current guidelines deal with audible noise but the effects of lower frequency sound needs to be investigated.

"Not everybody is affected by wind farms, either in the Clare Valley or around other wind farms, but some people are very affected and appear to have very significant issues with them and we're trying to understand that better," he said.

Local resident and advocate Mary Morriss says they are hoping scientific evidence may lead to guideline changes in regards to where wind farms can be built.

She says some residents have already left their homes because of the noise.

"Those four families don't live there any more," she said.

"They come back to do work some of them but basically they can't sleep in their own home, they've had to make other arrangements, some of them live in a shed or a caravan."


Quote:
Just a bunch of folks blaming their typical ageing health issues on wind turbines. Their air conditioners and fridges make more noise than a turbine several km's away would do.

CeeBee. Do you live near a wind farm?



Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:07


No, but I have visited wind farms and the noise they make is negligible. The wind turbine noise from 5 km's away would be far less than a neighbours fridge at a distance of 1km!
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:10

Originally Posted By: CeBee
Just a bunch of folks blaming their typical ageing health issues on wind turbines. Their air conditioners and fridges make more noise than a turbine several km's away would do.

That would have to be one of the most ignorant and nastiest comments about the distress of others made on this forum for quite a long time
Posted by: liberator

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:10

Seriously Ceebee - until you walk a mile in someone else’s shoes don’t bother commenting. Unless you have had first hand experience in these situations it really is an uncalled for comment. I’ve visited a wind farm and found the whoosh whoosh whoosh sound to be quite soothing. But I was there for only 20 or so minutes. I have no idea what it would sound like all day everyday 365 days a year. What about the other non-audible sounds that has been referred to in research? Go and spend a month in a farm near a wind farm and then give us some knowledge feedback on what you have found – not some subjective opinion.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:26

Another interesting fact (and one that doesn't get reported or mentioned) that I discovered last night is during a bush fire, which is the norm during ANY Australian summer, fire-bombing IS NOT PERMITTED around wind farms!

The obvious reason being the risk of collision with the tower, but also the risk of the tower collapsing under the pressure of the 'bombing'. Also the fire retardant used in some 'bombings', usually coloured red, is acidic.
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:33

Could this be the reason why they are not taking the claims made by Ms Morris & Co seriously?

Green groups cry foul over email to generate "fake" complaints against Waterloo wind farm in South Australia

October 5 2012

Quote

GREEN energy groups are crying foul over an email campaign they claim is intended to generate fake complaints against the Waterloo wind farm in the state's mid-north.

The Clean Energy Council said the email, sent last month by local resident Mary Morris to about 100 residents in the area, encouraged them to invent health or noise complaints against the 37 turbine wind farm, 30km south east of Clare.

"What the email shows is that anti-wind farm campaigners will use a range of tactics to pressure authorities and make it seem as though there are more of them than there really are," CEC policy director Russell Marsh said.

"(However) It's important that wind farm developers consult closely with the local community around any new wind farm to ensure that any genuine concerns and issues are heard and addressed."

In the email, Ms Morris, who lives 17km from the wind farm, said Goyder Council had said it had received no written noise or health complaints regarding the Waterloo wind farm.

It asked residents to send in a written complaint to both the Goyder and Clare and Gilbert Valley councils, outlining the impact of the wind farm on their health and hearing.

"All it has to be is a simple letter stating that the noise and vibration is causing a serious disturbance to sleep and rest, and/or that people are becoming sick - mention elderly and frail people AND children as well, especially if this applies to you," the email said.

"If you have already sent in a letter, send again with a cover note that you wish your submission to be considered as a formal complaint about the effects of the Waterloo wind farm."



Both the Goyder and Clare and Gilbert Valley councils said they had received only a handful of letters related to the email, and they would not be taking any further action.



Ms Morris denied the email was intended to "coach" residents to send fictitious complaints.

She said it was instead intended to remind residents to ensure their concerns were properly taken into account.

End quote

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business/sa-business-journal/green-groups-cry-foul-over-email-to-generate-fake-complaints-against-waterloo-wind-farm-in-south-australia/story-e6fredel-1226489395372
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 09:57

Who's to say that the 'email' from Mrs Morris is legit?

Only yesterday I received two emails (ANZ & Western Union) stating:

Dear Western Union (ANZ) valued customer,

You received this email as a notice for the database update for this month. This update is designed by our IT engineers to provide higher security to our customers online accounts, prevent unauthorized account access and other types of online fraud.

You are required to update your online profile by clicking on the following link:
blah, blah, blah


Both emails are identical in wording, apart from ANZ or Western Union 'valued customer' and the names of the 'IT Assistant'.


I am NOT a member of either institution.

[EDIT] Oops. Sorry. The last two sentences answered my question.... blush
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 10:48

Quote

"Ms Morris denied the email was intended to "coach" residents to send fictitious complaints.

She said it was instead intended to remind residents to ensure their concerns were properly taken into account."

End quote
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 13:58

I was unaware that Saudi Arabia is making huge investments into Solar Energy : Blooberg link from May 2012
Quote:

Saudi Arabia is seeking investors for a $109 billion plan to create a solar industry that generates a third of the nation’s electricity by 2032, according to officials at the agency developing the plan.

The world’s largest crude oil exporter aims to have 41,000 megawatts of solar capacity within two decades, said Maher al- Odan, a consultant at the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy. Khalid al-Suliman, vice president for the organization known as Ka-care, said on May 8 in Riyadh that nuclear, wind and geothermal would contribute 21,000 megawatts.

“We are not only looking for building solar plants,” al- Odan said in an interview in Riyadh yesterday. “We want to run a sustainable solar energy sector that will become a driver for the domestic energy for years to come.”

“The Saudi Arabian government has a powerful incentive to diversify its energy mix to reduce dependence on oil,” said Logan Goldie-Scot, an analyst at New Energy Finance in London. “The state could generate an internal rate of return of approximately 12 percent if it built a PV plant and sold the displaced oil on the international markets.”


The Saudis created a rewable-energy research city in 2010 called Ka-care.

They are also in discussions with the French regarding Nuclear power .
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 13:59

South Australian EPA finds that the level of infrasound from wind turbines is insignificant and no different to any other source of noise, and that the worst contributors to household infrasound are air-conditioners, traffic and noise generated by people.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 14:44

The EPA’s study concluded that the level of infrasound at houses near wind turbines was no greater than in other urban and rural environments, and stated that "the contribution of wind turbines to the measured infrasound levels is insignificant in comparison with the background level of infrasound in the environment".

Infrasound is sound that is lower than 20 cycles per second (Hertz), and cannot be detected by normal human hearing.


Case closed - nothing to see - move along now...

Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 14:53

Originally Posted By: __PG__
South Australian EPA finds that the level of infrasound from wind turbines is insignificant and no different to any other source of noise, and that the worst contributors to household infrasound are air-conditioners, traffic and noise generated by people.


One of the first structural engineering lessons one learns is that of harmonic resonance. It has long been known that prolonged exposure to low frequency vibration will cause nausea, and other feelings of illness...

I'm guessing that that infrasound is not the problem (or at least the major one) - and everyone knows this. [the focus on infrasound is a smoke screen to shut complainants up]. It is the swish swish pressure pulses that will end up being identified as the cause of the reported illness near wind turbines. Case wide open.

[Some quickly googled links]:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00140138008924734
http://gimle.fsm.it/27/1/08.pdf
http://www.johnmartin.com/publications/vibration/design.pdf

And it must be noted that each individual can resopond differently to the same stimulus.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 15:31


Ah ok, so it's not the noise now it's the swish swish pressure pulses.

And you expect those pressure pulses to have an effect on humans several km's away sitting inside one's house?

If one were to sit on top of a turbine for an extended period of time then yes, there may be adverse health affects due to mechanical vibration.

Is that why you linked to that study on mechanical vibration?

And what is the relevance of the floor vibration study you linked to with wind turbines?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 15:46

Because it may just well be that the house that people are in vibrates - and that is why people report feeling ill at night and when indoors...

here is an oldie:
BUILDING VIBRATIONS INDUCED BY NOISE
ROTORCRAFT AND PROPELLER AIRCRAFT


and

HUMAN RESPONSE TO AIRCRAFT-NOISE-INDUCED BUILDING VIBRATION
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 16:02

Ahh.....case NOT CLOSED....as far as I can see or read.

The SA EPA report supplied by _PG_ (and which I read last night) is dated Jan 2013, and most possibly the 'study' that Mrs Morris has quoted in her emails to the EPA.

According to the (cough) ABC report that I quoted earlier (EPA to probe wind farm noise), dated 1st Feb, 2013:

The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) will begin monitoring low frequency noise around the Waterloo Wind Farm, in northern South Australia, later this year.

It says it will monitor noise levels for two months from the homes of residents near the wind farm in the Clare Valley.


Since today is the 5th Feb.........we are not even two months into the new year!

At a guess, I would say that this 'latest' study has yet to be carried out, or even started.



Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 16:26

As I said - studying noise will "prove" that there are no deleterious effects. Another furphy.

It is the repetitive beat / beat / beat that will be picked up in the ground - and more particularily in a building that will caues the illness.

http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/wp-co...-Owen-Black.pdf

The study suggests that: "no adverse hu~an response due to
building vibration is to be expected at locations 1n excess of 340 m upwind and
in excess of 430 m downwind fro~ the wind turbine generator"


but: "Wind turbine sound will be limited by a broadband sound det~ction distance of 2250 m
upwind and an impulsive sound detection distance of 3300 m in a downwind
direction."

And this is for a single turbine with a 80m diameter twin blade... Where there are multiple turbines in a wind farm, sound can amplify / cancel in difficult to predict ways - I would ensure that this is checked / eliminated as a priority. To me - it makes more sense than infrasound as a casue of the discomfort reported by near by inhabitants....
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 17:26

Originally Posted By: Arnost
Because it may just well be that the house that people are in vibrates - and that is why people report feeling ill at night and when indoors...

here is an oldie:
BUILDING VIBRATIONS INDUCED BY NOISE
ROTORCRAFT AND PROPELLER AIRCRAFT


and

HUMAN RESPONSE TO AIRCRAFT-NOISE-INDUCED BUILDING VIBRATION


Ah right - so a 747 or a prop aircraft at low altitude vibrates houses - that would be annoying. I can see why one would have probs sleeping with the noise from a 747 vibrating the house, but a wind turbine several km's away? Nope! Vibrations causing illness? Nope!
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 17:54

Quote:
I can see why one would have probs sleeping with the noise from a 747 vibrating the house, but a wind turbine several km's away? Nope! Vibrations causing illness? Nope!


And I can see why one would have probs with global warming if CO2 was measured in parts per thousand, but parts per million? Nope! CO2 causing global warming? Nope!
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 18:37

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
The EPA’s study concluded that the level of infrasound at houses near wind turbines was no greater than in other urban and rural environments, and stated that "the contribution of wind turbines to the measured infrasound levels is insignificant in comparison with the background level of infrasound in the environment".

Infrasound is sound that is lower than 20 cycles per second (Hertz), and cannot be detected by normal human hearing.


Case closed - nothing to see - move along now...



ROFL. In my slightly misspent youth I owned a VS Commodore Ute with a rather nice sound system in it. One element of this sound system was a 10" sub setup inside a bandpass box tuned to 16Hz. Now whilst it was true that you couldn't really hear the thing down that low, you certainly felt it. We all took turns to see how long we could stick it out at that frequency and we barely lasted a couple of minutes. You had to get out to escape the weird head / nausea that the system inflicted on you!

As for the traveling distances of the sound. Well longer wavelength sounds tend to travel further then shorter wavelengths so it maybe very possible that the sound could travel a couple of K, particularly if it is down wind and if the temperature is cool.

As Arnost said, case open!
Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 22:29

A few years back , for over 18 Mths length of time i lived no more than 400 M from a single stand alone 0.75MW Wind Turbine .
No i did not suffer any Health Issues in that short time period . But there are far more conditions and site specific weather and geographic conditions to consider .

On top of sleeping & living close to the Turbine I also worked even closer and for extended periods ON it and directed below and adjacent it .
Yes i was trained and over qualified to do so .
[Also for a fact gathering exercise , you will love to know that people are not allowed to enter a certain radius of the installations and even technicians aren't allowed to scale them unless they are isolated , mechanically locked or blades turned in .]

Back to story....

The Harmonics & pressure waves were a factor especially when down wind of the Turbine , although i couldn't define exactly how far it carried as predominant wind blew out to sea from its position . In a strong wind the pressure waves could be felt even with headphones on ( ie could be best described as pressure shock waves similar to small explosions or a " Medium" hard rock bands bass amplified at concerts . )
However this Turbine was only mounted on a short Tower ( 45M as opposed to typical 70M -100M) for its size , as it was ontop of a lone hill/mini mount . Most of the Harmonics were deployed by the Inverter at its Base , in which it was over worked as the Unit itself was good for 1MW but the Turbine Electonics and its Blades were choked to limit its contribution to the local remote grid as it couldn't be reliable enough to exceed 40 % of Total Network Load .

Anyway i found the most annoying thing ( and i admit for me Personally , was nothing but an inconvenience ) that the constant " yawing " in low to variable wind conditions carried the most noise . Thankfully being WA it was rarely through the night that low winds prevailed . A Mid morning Nap was pretty much close to out of the Question most days in summer though .

I can totally understand everyones opposition to them , personally I'm not offended by their existance .
I use the Seasick analogy to reference any discussion that is pointed at this subject .
I never get seasick , though others can ; often just at the thought of the Ocean .
My point being is experience can only be felt by the effected person , at which point their exact symptoms can only be relayed by themselves .


Anyway thought i might lend some facts to this discussion .
Feel free to PM me , anyone for any Renewable's Facts / Questions / Discussions .


Posted by: Petros

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 22:35

......
Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 22:42

.......
Posted by: George M

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/02/2013 23:16

Something to ponder which was brought about or inspired by "And I can see why one would have probs with global warming if CO2 was measured in parts per thousand, but parts per million?" in comment #1170559.
The CO2 that exists in parts per million in the atmosphere is still enough to support all the plant forms that live on the land and in the water.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 08:49

The reason for editing Petros's post went beyond what was allowable in our reasoning entry box. Here it is and please everyone take note:

Commenting on moderation publicly is prohibited. Consider this a warning to all, bans may be incurred for any future comments on the volunteer work carried out by the mods. The mods are allowing various viewpoints to be expressed on the CC forums provided they don't step outside the rules. Everyone has had numerous warnings, so there is no excuse.

Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 09:12

This should be pre empted with ...

I could no longer read and stay silent as someone/some people , decide that " They alone represent Humanity "
and that to maintain humanity's health and wellbeing we will often dismiss others conditions . Of which i feel is Very hypocritical .
It appears that ONE has their Skeptical Hat on for a change .!?

Regardless ,

Originally Posted By: Southern Oracle
A few years back , for over 18 Mths length of time i lived no more than 400 M from a single stand alone 0.75MW Wind Turbine .
No i did not suffer any Health Issues in that short time period . But there are far more conditions and site specific weather and geographic conditions to consider .

On top of sleeping & living close to the Turbine I also worked even closer and for extended periods ON it and directed below and adjacent it .
Yes i was trained and over qualified to do so .
[Also for a fact gathering exercise , you will love to know that people are not allowed to enter a certain radius of the installations and even technicians aren't allowed to scale them unless they are isolated , mechanically locked or blades turned in .]

Back to story....

The Harmonics & pressure waves were a factor especially when down wind of the Turbine , although i couldn't define exactly how far it carried as predominant wind blew out to sea from its position . In a strong wind the pressure waves could be felt even with headphones on ( ie could be best described as pressure shock waves similar to small explosions or a " Medium" hard rock bands bass amplified at concerts . )
However this Turbine was only mounted on a short Tower ( 45M as opposed to typical 70M -100M) for its size , as it was ontop of a lone hill/mini mount . Most of the Harmonics were deployed by the Inverter at its Base , in which it was over worked as the Unit itself was good for 1MW but the Turbine Electonics and its Blades were choked to limit its contribution to the local remote grid as it couldn't be reliable enough to exceed 40 % of Total Network Load .

Anyway i found the most annoying thing ( and i admit for me Personally , was nothing but an inconvenience ) that the constant " yawing " in low to variable wind conditions carried the most noise . Thankfully being WA it was rarely through the night that low winds prevailed . A Mid morning Nap was pretty much close to out of the Question most days in summer though .

I can totally understand everyones opposition to them , personally I'm not offended by their existance .
I use the Seasick analogy to reference any discussion that is pointed at this subject .
I never get seasick , though others can ; often just at the thought of the Ocean .
My point being is experience can only be felt by the effected person , at which point their exact symptoms can only be relayed by themselves .


Anyway thought i might lend some facts to this discussion .
Feel free to PM me , anyone for any Renewable's Facts / Questions / Discussions .


Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 09:53

I covered the most likely reasons for the debilitating effects of wind turbine harmonics and pressure pulses generated by the rotating blades of wind turbines on some but not all people as Southern Oracle has so accurately outlined, in my post in the Alternative Energy Scam thread on page 9 of that thread.

It's a real effect on the human audio system's canals in the ear which are very sensitive to pressure changes which of course human speech and all those other sounds we hear are ALL just changes in air pressure patterns which our audio system within the ear picks up and which the brain then translates into meaningful sounds.
The whole system brain wise is somewhat similar to the visual effects of light strobing which in some people is quite disabling and can for others, be very discomforting and distressing.
The same visual effect can create quite high stress levels very rapidly in some folk when we get rapid flicker patterns of lighting even in such mundane situations as driving past a collection of closely spaced trees on a road, where the sun is shining through those trees creating a picket fence type very rapidly changing pattern of alternating light and shade.
A minute or so of that and my annoyance levels start to rise rapidly.
It is also a light effect that light aircraft pilots sometimes get from the propeller reflections.

With wind turbines you get all of these light effects at various times according to the time of day as well as the sunlight levels plus the pulsing changes from the tip vortices of the blades as they sweep past a point which I have expanded on in that page 9 of the alternative energy scam thread .
All of these effects can be very sickening and debilitating for some more susceptible persons whereas others are totally unaffected.

I fully support Southern Oracles explanations and outline of this subject which should not be even challengeable unless of course there are massive amounts of money and investment and of course some billions in our taxes to be accessed by the wind turbine companies which like all such scammers and their supporters have no morals or ethics when it comes to making money over the health and wealth fare of the ordinary citizen
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 10:16

I am sorry but with so much destruction on this planet and so many man made problems the focus on wind turbines here is hard to believe. This debate would be useful if it was not aligned so strongly along climate change lines...The strongest voices here are the same ones who spend so much time in other threads damming anything aligned with AGM or what could be considered 'green'. That is not opinion, it is dogma. If the same energy could be put into trying to find common ground rather than searching out and attacking anything that could be seen as green then we would likely all be happier.
I wish I had as much time to trawl the net for anything that adds to already set opinions, but to be honest that would take us nowhere and thus would prefer to see some debate in here that diverges from the partisan. Go on - I bet we can do it if we try. From the little time I have I found this posted on Wikipedia: "There are anecdotal reports of negative effects from noise on people who live very close to wind turbines. Peer-reviewed research has generally not supported these statements." More here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_wind_power. Whilst I would not go as far as Ceebee and state case closed, I reckon the door is fairly close to shut.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 10:20

So now we have flickering light as one of the causes of illness from turbine blades?

And how exactly does this effect folks sitting inside their house several km's away?
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 10:57

Quote:
but to be honest that would take us nowhere and thus would prefer to see some debate in here that diverges from the partisan


Kev, unfortunately wind turbines are just the wrong solution for an advanced, industrial nation. Esp. when proposed to be used to replace conventional powerstations.

If you want to posit the argument that wind turbines (or solar) should be built in the poorer nations in Africa for example or to remote / isolated areas. You have all my support. For that is the way to get electricity to the poorest and least educated. And education is the first step to raising onself out of poverty. Human ingeniousness is such that the info on the webs - or advice from people around the world - will potentially better (and extend) many millions of lives!

Wind turbines are dangerous to nature, expensive (and carbon intensive) to build, have a limited lifespan, are expensive to maintain and don't WORK. They are a not the panacea that they are made out to be.

And hi! Long time no see on these fora!
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 11:26

Arnost, thank you, the cyclone coming down the coast was enough to draw me back in smile From the same Wiki article: "The energy consumed to manufacture and transport the materials used to build a wind power plant is equal to the new energy produced by the plant within a few months." Tried to go to the reference but I was forbidden access so cannot quantify any further. I guess we diverge on their use - I see them as part of the solution (but definitely not all of it) whilst you state they are the wrong solution. Dangerous to nature, for sure to some degree, but then I see nuclear power as a LOT more dangerous than wind turbines.

I've seen some posts on here about exciting new ways of generating power that go outside our current techniques, and that is something that does interest me. Have read reports that many potential ideas have been bought up and killed by the fossil fuel industry, but trying to avoid going down that path - already enough conspiracies online as it is...
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 12:39

ROM just to clear something up. When you speak of tip vortices are you speaking of turbulence patterns created by the aerodynamic properties of the blades & governed by laws that are independent of the laws of acoustics? Or is there some interaction?

When you speak of pressure pulses & pulsing changes you are of coarse talking about sound,the oscillation of pressure in a medium. So in the case of tip vortices you mean the noise generated by vibrations in the tip surfaces.
So sound, pulsing as in frequency eg Hz with a sound wave amplitude (sound pressure level)as in decibels or micropascals governed by the laws of acoustics.
So why is this expressed as pressure waves, pressure pulses or pulsing changes & not say that a sub audible,narrow band 10hz centred 80db @ 100m sound source is the problem. That way it should be possible to calculate the sound pressure levels at any given distance.

So just for fun if I take the 10Hz 80db@100m & use a rule of thumb 4db fall for every 100m away from the source you would reach 0db @ 2000 metres.The answer is probably wrong & of coarse this doesn't take into account temperature,humidity,ambient background noise,reflection,absorption ect ect.Its just for fun remember!
Also the decibel system is based around the human ear so reaching 0db might not rule out the presence of sound pressure levels in the micropascal scale.

If someone was sensitive to extremely low sound pressure levels in any frequency range what would life be like? I would think just living in the modern broadband background noise world would be a living hell.
So why this condition didn't appear years ago is the question.

Hmmm...bosses beware the clams for damages from the office air conditioner!
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 15:54

Sound is merely the vibration of parcels of air. There is no sound in a vacuum.
Piano strings vibrate, and in doing so vibrate the air or surrounding gas molecules which in turn if the downstream vibrations of the chain of gas molecules that make up air, reach a human ear, vibrate the ear drum which in turn stimulates the tiny hairs behind the ear drum which are connected to nerves which transmit those electrical and chemical signals from those nerves to be deciphered as sounds by the brain.
So any pulses below the frequencies of auditory levels of human detection can inflict quite strong signals on the human hearing system even though they are not actually heard.
I think most people have often felt very low frequency sound but have not actually heard it.
Elephants are now known to use very low frequency sound well below the human threshhold of detection which is why this characteristic of elephants has only just been discovered, to transmit messages for kilometres between herd and family members.

The tip vortice effects of an aerofoil which is all that a wind turbine blade is, generate quite intense pressure pulses which as I pointed out in my posts on tip vortices effect in the Alternative energy scam thread, can be quite painful when one stands near a large helicopter as it winds it's rotor up to operating RPM and thats with the blades feathered, not producing lift.

When the blade pitch is positive, providing lift for take off and flight, the pressures between the high pressure under side of the blade and the low pressure on the upper side of the blades increases the energy in the blade tip vortices by large amounts as the pressures near the tip cause the high and low pressures to try and equalise around the blade tip as in those diagrams in the alternative energy post creating a tip trailing vortice.
And that can get very painful to the human hearing.

The only difference in principle to a helicopter rotor and a wind turbine is that the wind turbine blades are being driven by the wind as against the helicopter blades being powered.
And in fact a gyrocopter is just like a wind turbine.
The blades of a gyrocopter are not powered at all, they auto rotate as the rotation is maintained by the wind flow through the blades and the blades subsequently generate lift enabling the gyrocopter to fly.

All aerofoils of any shape unless they are infinitely long and have no ends, generate tip vortices and wind turbines are merely aerofoils extracting energy out of natural airflow and not very efficiently at that.

When those below the human detection frequencies of sound and are highly repetitive every few seconds tip vortice pulses, day in and day out, week in and week out it can and will have a very serious psychological and physical effect on a good percentage of the population.

For those who deny this effect. don't be such bloody hypocrites!'
Go and live near and under the wind turbines yourself and mix with the locals who are forced to do this through no action of their own for a few weeks or months before passing judgement on those who are forced to do so through the wind farm investors deciding to install wind turbines in their neighbourhood.

Something that is not of their making but is the direct effect of the save the planet mob who advocated the turbines which of course are never ever installed anywhere near a city let alone in the suburbs of a city.
When I see wind turbines erected in the fancy high priced inner city investor enclaves and suburban areas where the power is really needed I will accept that they are free of deleterious health effects on humans.

I suspect that nearly every one of those who accuse the sufferers of the wind farm effect of making it all up would be hypocritical enough to object quite strongly, perhaps violently if it was proposed to build a nuclear reactor a couple of kilometres from their homes and they had no say , no consultation and nobody would listen to them.
And yet nuclear reactors have extremely low levels of radiation that health wise for those in the vicinity have far less impact than a wind turbine farm has on those forced to live in the vicinity.

And in the end why and what is the purpose of creating this suffering and the debilitating human health problems, this immense destruction of wealth , the creation of criminal schemes and the scamming of the public and the public purse for when wind turbines save at the most about 9% of CO2 emissions compared toa similar amount of power from fossil fuels.

A Dutch study in fact shows that in some cases in the Netherlands the wind turbines and their back up systems and the CO2 emission costs of building, maintaining and running turbines actually leads to an INCREASE in CO2 emissions against the same power output being generated by fossil fuels such as gas.

Another study, American this time, dated Feb 2013, or that is these last few days, entitled; "The Limits of Wind Power" is yet another analysis of wind power with similar results to the UK and Dutch studies

Quote:
Table 5 compares electrical generation costs for various technologies. Generally, wind power is on
the high end of cost, with coal and nuclear being on the low end. For example, in the UK onshore
wind power is 60% more expensive than nuclear;25 in the EU, onshore wind power is up to twice
the cost of nuclear. Note that the costs for wind power assume relatively low levels of wind pen-
etration, and therefore do not include additional costs to pay for spinning reserves as wind penetra-
tions increase to higher levels.

&
Quote:
It is commonly held that wind power has zero or nearly zero CO2 emissions, with most of these emissions coming from manufacturing and installation of the wind turbines. Digging deeper, however, reveals that many other factors limit the amount of CO2 emissions that can be avoided when wind power is added to the grid.
Among these are factors related to wind’s unpredictable nature,which in turn negatively affects grid reliability—requiring spinning reserves and storage, which also typically have other environmental impacts. For similar reasons, the costs of wind power increase dramatically with penetration.

This analysis of PJM data shows that it is possible to build more wind turbines in order to increase wind penetration, thus satisfying more of a grid’s demand using wind energy. In order to maintain grid reliability at high wind penetrations, it becomes necessary to build energy storage that fills when there is too much wind to supply demand, and empties when wind speed is too low to supply demand.
Even with large amounts of available storage (18 weeks was the maximum in this study),there will be periods when storage is full and there is more wind than required to meet demands.
During these periods, wind dumping occurs. Conversely, at low wind penetrations, there can be prolonged periods when wind is insufficient to meet demand, and there is no available storage left.
During these periods, conventional power reserves (usually natural gas plants) supply power to meet demands. Since natural gas generation plants generate CO2, their emissions are included in the accounting for wind power.
The analysis presented here demonstrates that there is a tradeoff. At low wind penetrations, there is very little impact on CO
2 emissions. As wind penetrations increase, the grid requires increasing amounts of spinning reserves to maintain reliability.

At high wind penetrations, even large amounts of power storage cannot prevent significant (and expensive) wind dumping. The already high cost of wind power increases with the construction of storage facilities, and the cost to construct extra wind turbines, which will be dormant during periods of wind dumping.

Figure 21 summarizes these findings. The German company E.ON is basing its wind strategy for 2020 on an ultimate wind penetration of less than 4%. It has recognized the wind-induced reliability impacts on its grid.
Using E.ON’s conservative assumptions, the realizable CO2 emissions reduction due to wind is about 18g of CO2 equivalent/kWh, or about 3.6% of total emissions.

This analysis points to 20% as the extreme upper limit for wind penetration. At this point, the maximum realizable CO 2 emissions reduction due to wind is approximately 90g CO2eq/kWh, or about 18% of total.

However, it’s more likely that 10% wind penetration is the upper limit, given the increased storage costs, decreased grid reliability and increasing operating costs required to achieve this level.
At this more realistic point, the maximum realizable CO2 emissions reduction due to wind is approximately 45g CO2 eq/kWh, or about 9% of total.



Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 19:51

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/sy...-brief-2012.pdf

See page 12 Table of Overall Energy 2000 to 2011.

Please note the total for wind generators = 0.7%

Now can someone please explain to me how spending billions of pounds on producing just 0.7% of the total power generated is not only a criminal waste of money but has a complete and utter failure to provide anything like stated capacity?
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 21:58

They've got to be seen to be doing something though SBT?????
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/02/2013 22:54

Ahh right ROM I think I get the pulsing now.
The sound is louder from each blade on its downward stroke because the sound is directed towards the ground,so the swish swish in the audible range & the pulsing feel in the low frequency inaudible range(sub 20hz). I'm guessing if you had a microphone inline with the axis of hub the pulsing would disappear as the sound from each blade would be constant.
Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 00:57

Just a wild guess , but i beleive the Pulsing is more the Frequency ( timing , not audible / vibrations released ) . I would have thought that as each blade passes the Tower , that a: the wind load would diminish/or even reverse depending on wind speed b: passing relatively close that interaction of the trailing vortex with the tower actually gives out a lesser strength ( longer signwave / audible swooshing sound ) .

Both of these make among other things , including blade tip configuration quite a complex subject . Of which I'm not qualified to speak with authority on .
Obviously different brands / designs and something that hasn't also been mentioned . Which would fit into the category of Temperature, Humidity etc.
is some cases ( salt air ) and buildup of all types / dust / grime etc .

Anyway my two cents , right or wrong .
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 09:49

I haven't much time to comment as I am helping in the running of our annual gliding competition here in Horsham.
But SO is pretty well on the money again.

The blade tip vortice pulses could be classified as "sound" but are a few octaves in frequency below the thresh hold of human hearing.
Another analogy is those sub woofers or whatever you call them that the young bucks install in their cars which pulse out those big energy sounds way down in the frequency spectrum and which you often feel as well as hear when they have it wound up in volume.
It can be quite annoying when one, particularly if you are older than about 30, is subject to that sort of sound for more than couple of minutes.
Now most people can take those big deep , high energy sounds for some time but take that continuous pulse of those sub woofers at full volume, drop their frequency another few octaves until they are below the threshhold of human sound frequency detection and just run those woofers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 12 months of the year with only the occasional break.

Thats the sort of debilitating sound effects that the residents close to turbines have to put up with. Certainly it will drive some people crazy and I suspect I would be one of them as I find those woofers very disturbing even for a very short time.

Again SO is quite correct in there are so many variations in reflections and probable amplification at times of those pulses by the towers plus the air moisture levels , temperatures and temperature gradients, terrain and innumerable other factors some of which reinforce one another and others that cancel one another in this health problem created by the turbines in close proximity to houses and dwellings.

The wing tip vortices and therefore pressure pulses from aerofoil tips and the consequent loss of aerodynamic efficiency, a very important component of aircraft design, can be reduced very substantially by clever design of the tips of the wings / aerofoils.
Which is why you see those vertical winglets sticking up on the ends of the wings of airliners.
They are designed to decrease the flow of high pressure air from under the wing tip around the tip into the low pressure region on top of the wing aerofoil and in doing so reduce the tip vortices and increase the efficiency of the wing.

The tip vortices from the very high wing loadings of airliners are powerful enough to flip a light aircraft over if they get caught in those wing tip vortices close behind an airliner which is why there is a couple of minutes gap required of light aircraft between the departure or landing of a heavy passenger aircraft and the landing or take off of a light aircraft to allow those intense wing tip vortices to lose energy and dissipate.

The wind turbine blades are a horrendously complex aerodynamic and structural design problem.
Different aerofoil shapes are needed down the blade length as the velocity of the blade changes along it's length during rotation.
The pressure changes then twist the blades so the fibre glass rovings, the way the firbre glass reinforcement of the blades is laid out has to be very carefully designed for maximum strength and to stop the twisting which distorts the aerofoil and therefore loses blade efficiency.
The blade weight problem is acute due to the centripetal forces of the rotating blade so strength and weight are in conflict with one another,
Fibre glass cures right through it's lifetime so over a period of a decade or less there will be significant changes in the critical aerofoil shape as the blades fibre glass construction shrinks and changes as the resins cure which again is one of the reasons why turbines have the very significant drop of in performance in less than 5 years and getting worse from then on which I posted and commented on in the alternative energy thread.

The end result being that minimisation of noise and pressure pulses from tip vortices and all those other factors mentioned by SO that create serious health problems in people forced through no fault of theirs to live in the vicinity of a turbine, are ignored by the turbine manufacturers and the wind farm investors.

Those turbine blades are nearer to a plough share than to a sword in sophistication.

So the peasants are made to sufer health problems while the wealthy investors and the turbine manufacturers could' nt give a damn about those unfortunate enough to have to live close to a wind farm and it's turbines.
It is a damn sight cheaper for those weathlty and uncaring, some would say callous, investors and manufacturers to create a heap of propaganda denigrating as we have seen here, the claims of those whose health is affected by turbines than it would be to do the research at a very great expense to try and minimise all the debilitating consequences of all the wide range of sub aural and pressure pulses created by the wind turbine operation.

In a nutshell, wind turbine manufacturers can and could minimise all those health effects with a complete redesign of every aspect of those turbines.,blades, towers and etc
They won't as earning profits comes before a a considerable number of susceptible individuals health.

Only when investors are forced to pay out millions in compensation which will eventually happen and wind farms are shut down will the message get through to the manufacturers and the investors and by then it will be too late for a lot of affected individuals and also for the wind industry as it's callousness and greed and it's gross rip off of the public purse is revealed for all to see
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 10:09

Just in case you missed this:

The EPA’s study concluded that the level of infrasound at houses near wind turbines was no greater than in other urban and rural environments, and stated that "the contribution of wind turbines to the measured infrasound levels is insignificant in comparison with the background level of infrasound in the environment".


Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 13:09


The EPA's study of Gamma-ray emissions from wind turbines was no greater than a foreast as well - close to zero.

Now it wasn't expected that wind turbines would emit Gamma-rays since these are usually generated in major super-nova events only but it does suggest that we can build wind turbines anywhere and there will be no impacts at all on anything at all.
Posted by: Petros

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 18:32

..... except on the poor old tax payer who has to fund the subsidies to make the manufacture and installation of these things viable. Short term profits skimmed by the investors, the legacy to be continued to be funded by us for decades.

If wind generation is the go, why dont we pool our money, buy some and sit back and earn the profits? Answer, because they lack return the investment unless "someone" kindly pays more for the electricty produced than that paid to the other electricity generating market participants who have to compete on a true cost basis into the same market.

It requires an electricity payment of $150MWHr to provide an investment return over a 15 year period, yet our wholesale market only provides circa $55/MWhr to generators (was circa $28/MWHr 7 months ago before the carbon tax doubled the wholesale power costs which now must be passed through to us poor consumers - the full extent of that pain is yet to arrive).
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 18:55

Bloomberg New Energy Finance and Peter Hannam say that Australia will never again build a coal-fired power station.

Even without a carbon tax, solar and wind is now cheaper. Plus no major bank will stump-up finance for a coal plant because the future risks are too great.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 18:58

Please produce data and financial figures providing justification for that claim including the costs of the back up power units required when there is no wind and it's night time over heavily overcast and solar is useless.

Stupidity reigns in some commentators minds as Germany has been there and done precisely all of that with both wind and solar and with the same identical beliefs in wind and solar.
The Germans are now frantically building some 15 or 16 COAL [ coal from the USA where it is Too expensive for power generation as shale gas is now so cheap all generators are moving over to gas allowing a surplus of coal to build up which the Germans and europeans are buying for their new generators ] fired power stations to try and get reliability back into the power systems, reduce soaring energy costs to make power affordable again for the average worker.
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 19:04

Yeah. I'm not personally against wind or solar but that claim does seem a bit ludicrous.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 19:30

Page 19 of the Alternative Energy Scam thread gives figures for the penetration of wind and solar here in Australia plus the levels of subsidies those rip offs are getting.

Also;

Growing Criticism: Germany’s Transition To Renewable Energy Is Leading To All Pain And No Gain

From the UK
The report, Analysis of UK Wind Power Generation November 2008 to December 2010,
Quote:
The report also found that during the study period, wind generation was:

# below 20% of capacity more than half the time

# below 10% of capacity over one third of the time

# below 2.5% capacity for the equivalent of one day in twelve

# below 1.25% capacity for the equivalent of just under one day a month


From my post page 16 Alternative energy scam;

Quote:
Lets run through a few numbers on the wind energy numbers as they would apply to Australia if we were to rely on wind alone for all our energy which is what the greens and the alarmists are basically demanding.

First, Australia's total electrical energy generation capacity stands at close to 55 GW's

Secondly using the "Sustainable Energy" site's [ above post ] conservative in favour of wind's numbers of wind generation being able to generate about 1.4 MW's per square kilometre.[ James Lovelock of Gaia fame claims that wind only generates on average about 0.4 MW's per square kilometre or about 1/3rd of the above figure so go figure! ]

At 1.4 MW's / sq km output from wind power generation, it will take around an area of some 40,000 sq/ kms or an area 200 kms by 200 kms or about 2/3rds of Tasmania's total area, covered wall to wall with wind turbines to generate all of Australia's electrical power needs, at least when the wind is blowing.

Now it costs some where around $2 million to $3 million dollars per MW of "plated" wind power capacity to build and install wind turbines
[ American figures ]
So if we split the difference and say $2.5 millions per MW to install wind power then it would cost Australia some $140,000,000,000 ie; $140 billion dollars to install enough wind power to supply Australia when the wind was blowing sufficiently fast enough to generate power.

But hang on for a bit!
That was the cost per "Plated" capacity and we know that wind generators only generate about an average of 25% of their "Plated" capacity .

So we now have to quadruple, multiply by 4 times that $140 billion dollars to about $560 billion dollars or over half a trillion dollars to pay for that wind power that will supply Australia with enough energy to replace all those fossil fuel powered generators, at least while the wind is blowing.

But of course if James Lovelock of Gaia fame is right and wind only generates on average about 0.5 MW per sq/ km then we have to do those numbers all over again and multiply the area and the number of wind turbines and that $560 billion dollars by another 3 times.
And that is getting numbers that really make the eyes go round!

Some 120,000 sq / kms covered with wind turbines or an area about a tenth the size of the NT and about $1.6 trillion dollars, one thousand, six hundred Billion dollars to set up enough wind turbines to supply Australia when the wind actually blows if Lovelock is right with his actual, real 0.5MW wind generation capacity per sq / km.

I would like to see how Lovelock arrived at his numbers but he is of course the darling of the Greens with his Gaia religion so who am I to doubt him?

[ more ]
Australia's annual GDP is about $1.75 trillion dollars and those wind turbines are now known to last on average only about 15 years, not the 20 years claimed by the industry so in 15 or 20 years the entire procedure of replacing those turbines at a cost of another trillion dollars or so will have to be repeated.
Solar has an even shorter lifetime and costs a lot more per kilowatt generated.

Coal fired stations have a life of about 40 years and nuclear about 50 to 60 years

Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 19:41


Texas mega-battery aims to green up the grid

IN A remote corner of west Texas, in the shadow of a sprawling wind farm, one of the world's largest batteries was switched on last week. Deep in oil country, the battery is at the vanguard of efforts to help renewable energy sources realise their potential and, ultimately, oust fossil fuels in the US.

Built for energy giant Duke Energy by local start-up Xtreme Power, the array is the biggest and fastest battery in the world. It can deliver 36 megawatts of wind power to the grid over a period of 15 minutes.

The battery's job is to act as a buffer, smoothing out the supply of electricity from the 153 MW Notrees wind farm nearby. The intermittent nature of wind power means fossil fuel powered turbines often have to step in to match energy supply with demand. The battery at Notrees bridges the gap, says Haresh Kamath of the Electric Power Research Institute in Washington DC. "When you ramp power plants up and down they lose efficiency," he says. "It used to be the best way to do it, but if we have storage like Notrees, we make wind plants more efficient."

It also makes the entire grid more resilient to spikes in demand, because battery arrays can respond almost instantly, whereas natural gas power plants take about 15 minutes to boost their output.

The Notrees battery is the first in a wave of new grid-connected storage systems funded in 2009 by power companies and the US Department of Energy (DOE) that are expected to come online this year. Notrees has bus-sized, lead-acid battery modules with high surface area electrodes and multiple terminals, so electricity flows in and out quickly.

Most of the other DOE-funded projects look very different. The California-based Pacific Gas and Electricity Company will soon start filling depleted gas wells near Bakersfield with compressed air that can deliver 300 MW of power. In Modesto, a wind farm will be backed up by a 25 MW storage system based on a zinc-chloride flow battery, which is charged by filling with a reusable electrolyte liquid. The battery will replace a planned 50 MW fossil fuel plant.

"There are storage projects all over the country, and 2013 is the year for all of these to come online and start working," says Mike Gravely of the California Energy Commission. "The goal is to give you enough energy to manage variability, or to give you enough time to find alternative resources."

read full article
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 20:04

From ; Green Corruption
USA

Big Wind Energy Subsidies: A Hurricane of Carnage, Cronyism and Corruption

Quote:
“Congress first enacted the wind energy PTC in 1992 and has renewed it seven times since,” even as part of the 2009-Recovery Act. The Institute for Energy Research counts the hidden realities of the PTC extension, noting that "The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that the one year extension will cost American taxpayers over $12 billion." "But that figure doesn’t begin to represent the full cost of wind power,” including the detriment to ratepayers. And if Big Wind gets its way over "the next six years, then the PTC would cost over $50 billion."


Quote:
Last September, I highlighted four Obama cronies that made a special DNC Cameo, which included Jim Rogers, Chairman of Duke Energy, the 2012 DNC host as well as an Obama donor.
Duke was the recipient of a $22 million DOE grant from the 2009-Recovery Act “to design, build and install large-scale batteries to store wind energy at one of its wind farms in Texas.”
Then June 8, 2010, Notrees Windpower LP received a 1603 grant worth over $90 million for “wind in Texas” [docket #7812 –– $90,354,625]

$22 million dollars for a 15 minutes storage battery plus $90 million subsidy for the NoTrees wind turbines and they are small fry when you read the Green Corruption blog with it's notated dockets as proof..

And don't for a moment imagine the renewable energy corruption is not here in Australia in spades as we are seeing in the refusal of the authorities to thoroughly investigate the claims of the debilitating health effects from the turbines on close residents .
Posted by: Petros

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 20:24

Originally Posted By: __PG__
Bloomberg New Energy Finance and Peter Hannam say that Australia will never again build a coal-fired power station.

Even without a carbon tax, solar and wind is now cheaper. Plus no major bank will stump-up finance for a coal plant because the future risks are too great.


Re wind power cheaper than a coal fired power station in Australia. ABSOLUTE AND UTTER ROT.
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 20:39

Finally some frequency figures for blade tip vortices & on wind turbine blades.

Numerical Approach for Noise Reduction of
Wind Turbine Blade Tip with Earth Simulator

Extracts

The purpose of this research is to investigate the physical mechanisms associated with tip vortex
noise caused by rotating wind turbines with giant size of computational fluid dynamics. The flow and
acoustic field around the WINDMELIII wind turbine is simulated using compressible Large-Eddy simulation
(LES), with emphasis on the blade tip region. The acoustic near field is simulated directly by LES whereas
the far field is modeled using acoustic analogy. Due to the fine grid employed, smallest eddy scales near the
blade surface are resolved. Aerodynamic performance and acoustic emissions are predicted for the actual tip
shape and an ogee type tip shape. A decrease of the sound pressure level in the high frequency domain is
observed for the ogee type tip shape. The present simulation research using the Earth Simulator shows that
large scale simulation is really useful in designing the aerodynamic manufacturing such as the wind turbine

&

The importance of noise emission in the outer blade
region was also pointed out by Nii et al. [4]. They performed
acoustic tests on the WINDMELIII, shown in
Fig. 1. WINDMELIII was developed at the National
Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology.
A noise source was found to be located at the very tip of
the blade for frequencies from 3.1 kHz to 6.3 kHz, suggesting
a small but intense vortex shedding from the tip.
As a general conclusion of the acoustic tests on WINDMELIII,
the authors state that highest levels of noise
source were found to be in the blade tip region, with levels
decreasing towards the blade root.

End

So the sound produced by the vortices ranges from 3.1kHz to 6.3kHz which converts to 3100Hz to 6300Hz in the hertz scale.

Infrasound is in the 0Hz to 20Hz range the same range produced by sub woofers.
This study indicates there is no infrasound associated with wind turbine blade tip vortices.

http://www.jamstec.go.jp/esc/publication/journal/jes_vol.2/pdf/JES2_arakawa.pdf



.
Posted by: Petros

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 20:44

Originally Posted By: ROM
Page 19 of the Alternative Energy Scam thread gives figures for the penetration of wind and solar here in Australia plus the levels of subsidies those rip offs are getting.

Also;

Growing Criticism: Germany’s Transition To Renewable Energy Is Leading To All Pain And No Gain

From the UK
The report, Analysis of UK Wind Power Generation November 2008 to December 2010,
Quote:
The report also found that during the study period, wind generation was:

# below 20% of capacity more than half the time

# below 10% of capacity over one third of the time

# below 2.5% capacity for the equivalent of one day in twelve

# below 1.25% capacity for the equivalent of just under one day a month


From my post page 16 Alternative energy scam;

Quote:
Lets run through a few numbers on the wind energy numbers as they would apply to Australia if we were to rely on wind alone for all our energy which is what the greens and the alarmists are basically demanding.

First, Australia's total electrical energy generation capacity stands at close to 55 GW's

Secondly using the "Sustainable Energy" site's [ above post ] conservative in favour of wind's numbers of wind generation being able to generate about 1.4 MW's per square kilometre.[ James Lovelock of Gaia fame claims that wind only generates on average about 0.4 MW's per square kilometre or about 1/3rd of the above figure so go figure! ]

At 1.4 MW's / sq km output from wind power generation, it will take around an area of some 40,000 sq/ kms or an area 200 kms by 200 kms or about 2/3rds of Tasmania's total area, covered wall to wall with wind turbines to generate all of Australia's electrical power needs, at least when the wind is blowing.

Now it costs some where around $2 million to $3 million dollars per MW of "plated" wind power capacity to build and install wind turbines
[ American figures ]
So if we split the difference and say $2.5 millions per MW to install wind power then it would cost Australia some $140,000,000,000 ie; $140 billion dollars to install enough wind power to supply Australia when the wind was blowing sufficiently fast enough to generate power.

But hang on for a bit!
That was the cost per "Plated" capacity and we know that wind generators only generate about an average of 25% of their "Plated" capacity .

So we now have to quadruple, multiply by 4 times that $140 billion dollars to about $560 billion dollars or over half a trillion dollars to pay for that wind power that will supply Australia with enough energy to replace all those fossil fuel powered generators, at least while the wind is blowing.

But of course if James Lovelock of Gaia fame is right and wind only generates on average about 0.5 MW per sq/ km then we have to do those numbers all over again and multiply the area and the number of wind turbines and that $560 billion dollars by another 3 times.
And that is getting numbers that really make the eyes go round!

Some 120,000 sq / kms covered with wind turbines or an area about a tenth the size of the NT and about $1.6 trillion dollars, one thousand, six hundred Billion dollars to set up enough wind turbines to supply Australia when the wind actually blows if Lovelock is right with his actual, real 0.5MW wind generation capacity per sq / km.

I would like to see how Lovelock arrived at his numbers but he is of course the darling of the Greens with his Gaia religion so who am I to doubt him?

[ more ]
Australia's annual GDP is about $1.75 trillion dollars and those wind turbines are now known to last on average only about 15 years, not the 20 years claimed by the industry so in 15 or 20 years the entire procedure of replacing those turbines at a cost of another trillion dollars or so will have to be repeated.
Solar has an even shorter lifetime and costs a lot more per kilowatt generated.

Coal fired stations have a life of about 40 years and nuclear about 50 to 60 years


Sorry ROM, there is a flaw in that argument: when you multiply by 4 the wind generated output to cater for the 75% of the time these things sit still and let the birds through, you are missing the point that when they DO generate, the electrical system power demand is normally substantially lower than at the peak periods that it is really required (IMO 20-25% lower).

Therefore we will have a huge generation surplus that needs to be stored until the wind stops blowing and the energy needed again.

The only economically viable option currently proven (and costs genuine and proven in full scale existing projects) - is pumped water storage.

Small problem here, pumped storage is very inefficient so circa half the power "generated" is lost during pumping, then re-lost again via the efficiency of the hydro-generator when it is eventually called to operate.

And wouldn’t you believe it, …..bummer, those pumped storage systems exist way up in woop woop! So a very significant portion of that wind power is lost in heating power lines on its trip to the mountains, and (double bummer) lost again when generating up there to return to the nodes where power is required.

Reality is a bummer when a fantastic idea conjured up over a cup of latte in an inner city café just doesn’t stand up when its been sold to a naive government and the money (out of our pockets) is diverted from ridiculous non-green projects (such as hospitals) to the new religion – CO2 atmospheric concentration abation.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 21:29

Ok Crookhaven River! why is it then that wind turbines are well documented as killing very large numbers of bats by collapsing their lungs even though the bats do not even come in contact with the blades but only need to come within a few meters from the blades.

The documented bat kills at wind turbine farms is quite horrific and if the pulses and pressure changes from the wind turbine blades can kill bats without even striking them then it really says something about those who are unfortunate enough to be seriously affected both health wise and mentally by the ongoing constantly repetitive low frequency pressure pulses from those same turbines.
Again I have previously posted on this in the Alternative energy scam thread.

Wind Turbines Kill Bats Without Impact
Jessica Marshall, Discovery News

Quote:
Aug. 25, 2008 -- Researchers have found the cause behind mysterious bat deaths near wind turbines, in which many bat carcasses appeared uninjured.
The explanation to this puzzle is that the bats' lungs effectively blow up from the rapid pressure drop that occurs as air flows over the turbine blades.
"The idea had kind of been floating around, because people had noticed these bats with no injuries," said Erin Baerwald of the University of Calgary and lead author of a study about the finding in the journal Current Biology.
Researchers examined a large sample size of hoary and silver-haired bats found under wind turbines, performing necropsies on the bats within hours of their death.
The damage from rapidly expanding air in the lungs caused by the sudden drop in pressure was clear. Ninety percent of the bat deaths at the southern Alberta site involved internal hemorrhaging consistent with such damage, called barotrauma, while only 50 percent showed signs of collision with turbine blades.
For those overlapping cases, it may be that the bats flew through the pressure drop, suffered barotrauma, and then were struck by a blade. It is also possible that they were struck first, causing internal hemorrhaging.
But, Baerwald said, "When people were first starting to talk about the issue, it was 'bats running into the turbine blades.' We always said, 'No, bats don't run into things.' Bat's can detect and avoid all kinds of structures."
In fact, they are even better at detecting moving objects, Baerwald said.
"This kind of answers that mystery," she added. "It was something nobody could have predicted."
The bat fatalities appear to be a more significant problem than bird deaths from wind turbines in most locations. "Here we're picking up ten bats for every bird," Baerwald said.
"I can pick up nine different species of bird. I can pick up two species of bat," she added. "The impact on the populations is very different."
Whether these deaths are having a significant effect on the bat populations in Alberta or elsewhere is difficult to gauge because so little is known about the bats.


USGS
Bat Fatalities at Wind Turbines: Investigating the Causes and Consequences

Quote:
Dead bats are turning up beneath wind turbines all over the world. Bat fatalities have now been documented at nearly every wind facility in North America where adequate surveys for bats have been conducted, and several of these sites are estimated to cause the deaths of thousands of bats per year. This unanticipated and unprecedented problem for bats has moved to the forefront of conservation and management efforts directed toward this poorly understood group of mammals. The mystery of why bats die at turbine sites remains unsolved. Is it a simple case of flying in the wrong place at the wrong time? Are bats attracted to the spinning turbine blades? Why are so many bats colliding with turbines compared to their infrequent crashes with other tall, human-made structures?
Posted by: Things

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 22:24

Need to bring the wind turbines to Cairns then, the bats are out of control here. If the bats are close enough to the blades for that to happen, they were going to get hit anyway. We're talking millimetres here.
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/02/2013 23:06

I think the answer to your question is right here ROM "a few meters from the blades".
How far would these areas of low pressure move down wind at local wind speed before they returned to normal atmospheric pressure? A few more meters? Then they become a turbulence stream?

If thats not the case how do they manage to stay below atmospheric pressure for long enough at local wind speed to reach a persons home 2km away.

Or do you suspect that these low pressure areas are a producing infrasound sound waves as they return to atmospheric pressure & dissipate?
Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 00:40

For more background ( i went back through some of my paper work which was in storage ) , of the installation i was refering to earlier .
I won't name names , lets just say it was German and of highest quality . But the particular turbine's Tower was 46 M and the Blades ( 3) diameter 44 M .
Nominal 0.6 MW . Gearless ( which entails that its braked by the blades tilting / rotating to face the wind ) Electro magnetic rotor generator .

Very little mechanical noise , high harmonic noise ( but not very penetrating = high frequency from the inverters at the base ) nurled blade tips that produced a not too annoying swooshing noise , that was still blamed on occasion for " Bad Tee shots " from the nearby elevated 3rd tee .
And being not geared , nominal rotor/blade RPM's 17-18 . 5-7 M/s windspeed to pitch into the wind and grid connect , 25 M/s before tilting was used to maintain optimum rotor speed up until 35 M/s when Overspin would cut in . Which was played with a number of times as the low load diesels would struggle to catch up with the sudden loss of Generation . Eventually it was choked / via electronics ( less infeed to self produced /powered electro magnets ) and more so via Tilting . Can't recall exact figures of " Choked " Power output levels but somewhere in the vicinity of 50-60 % of an already detuned 600 Kw .
Edit : Approx 20 -40 Kw load to maintain reconnection and yaw to find wind when under 3 m/s for longer than 5 mins ?

Anyway , back to RPM's and Pressure Pulses or Infrasound for the Techy's .
Doesn't take a Math genius ( apologies Arnost ) to come up with the Frequency of each Pulse ( of each Blade passing the Tower ) . = 0.85 Hz
BUT i would add to that High Harmonics of the Inverter , the Blade Tips intricate Turbulence , the increased reaction in each pass especially when the blade tilt was at its max pitch ( tipping point ; before its Brake drag force overcomes its wind yield force ) , the deflection in the passing blade as it hits the Pocket infront of the tower and lastly any variance in wind speed not mention direction variabilty and knock on effects of earlier said blade pitch angle .

Good luck simulating that folks .

i believe the Higher Frequency could be carried further asa Harmonic of the Higher Strength lower wavelength Pressure Pulse .

Anyway as i said , too much for me to fathom . But clearly felt by someone with " sensitive eardrums " who had been previously damaged from a failed freediving equalisation years before hand and constantly disturbed by surfing in solid waves ( duckdives ) and random snorkeling/cray looping .

AGAIN , I'm not against them , and unfazed by most things that Nature can throw at me in the way of balance and nausea .

BUT again it should not be dismissed .

For some " I fear , that its not their Fear of the Taste of the Medicine , its the Forceful nature thats its given / supplied " .

And that last sentence , Probably sums up the the entire AGW arguement .
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 08:06

CR, on page 11 of the Alternative Energy Scam thread you will find a photo of a North Sea wind farm and the very long way downwind that the turbulence generated by those turbine blades extends to .
On page 9 you will find again research on the turbulence created and how by the turbine blades and the way in which that turbulence and pressure changes again extend a long way from the turbines.

We've been through all of this before and quite some time ago.
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 11:08

Interesting case in the UK: Anti-wind farm ads dismissed as hot air by watchdog
Quote:

An anti-wind farm group has been censured by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for mailing two "misleading" and "denigratory" brochures as part of a campaign against a planned development near Doncaster.

Among the statements dismissed by the ASA as "misleading" were the group's claim that "students... with pre-existing conditions such as autism and epilepsy" could be affected by shadow flicker and low-frequency noise, and the accusation substantial damage would be caused to nearby woodlands.

The ASA also dismissed the brochures' claims wind energy was linked to fuel poverty and caused health problems.

The ruling comes days after a poll revealed almost two-thirds of the UK public are in favour of onshore wind, while just 13 per cent oppose it.
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 11:30

And a world first for Australia:
Subsea to build 1MW wave generator of Port McDonnell
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 12:13

Originally Posted By: __PG__


How exciting! WooHoo!

... Well actually it is not the first...



http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/271346/port-kembla-wave-power-headed-to-sa/

Oceanlinx scammed millions from NSW taxpayers to get a generator out off Port Kembla, stuffed it up, and left the junked generator on the shore to rust. Now they scammed more money from South Australian tax payers. What's the bet that that project will end up being junk within a couple of years. And I will bet that they just leave the junk there. Green energy at its finest - eh?


http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/365702/broken-promises-over-abandoned-generator/
http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/628562/port-kembla-wave-generator-on-sea-floor/
Posted by: GDL

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 15:57

Hope this is made from stainless steel,dam sure the last one wasnt. .............GDL
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 17:24

Originally Posted By: GDL
Hope this is made from stainless steel,dam sure the last one wasnt. .............GDL


You don't want stainless steel - the evidence hangs around too long.


Actually!

If I wanted to get in on the scam I'd weld a couple of shipping containers together and spruce them up with a bit of piping, float the the thing out a couple of K of the coast and (pretend) link it with a cable to shore, and at the junction to the electricity grid I would have a plant and office set up to carefully monitor the outputs) [note the plant will require me to install a power generator (for emergency purposes you must understand) to maintain the facility]

And voila - a working 1MW generator.

Business Case / Costings:
Let's say I get a $4m grant like Oceanlinx did, then the cost of the "wave generator" (it generates waves as it bobs up and down!) at $100K and the cost of other bits and bobs $100K, cost of generator $50k and cost of a couple of fibro offices will all up leave some $3.5m. We have to allow another couple of hundred K for linking the diesel wave generator to the electricity grid [maybe we can get the counil to do that for free though] and then we need to buy a dinner or two to Oddie Ebaid - $1m.

And voila I'll be some $2m ahead!

We can then pull the plugs on the off shore contraption (in a big storm of course) and we can then start again (hmmmm did someone clever get Lloyds to insure the project for $10m?). Or if don't want to spend the money on insurance, if anyone wants us to salvage the thing - we can do it like Oceanlinx did it:

The Port Kembla Gen3 Generator after salvage



/sarc!
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 20:30

Originally Posted By: __PG__

Been there..... done that ...... smirk
Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 20:42

Originally Posted By: __PG__



I like the 6 jobs for only $4M in government funding.

It's a bargain.
Posted by: Kev86

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 20:50

There appears to be significant skepticism of the efficiency of Solar/Wind - however.

I run a reasonable sized Minerals Laboratory and our electricity costs exceed $25,000 a month. I'm very interested if an option exists to significantly reduce this bill, hell eliminate it. Our topography is suitable for wind turbines and solar to work quite optimally. We have the ability to utilize probably 8000m2 roof space [Conservative estimate] - anyone with some knowledge/advice on this would be appreciated. I've spoken to some energy organisations and am dubious of their spin-doctoring - any realistic suggestions?
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 21:23

The couple of questions
What is the main power consumption process.?

Is it heating and cooling and controlling temperatures in your buildings.?
Or is it in the industrial and processing of your testing and research.?
Or both and the split?

How much open land have you available around your laboratory ?
What is the type of soil on which your laboratory is built, rock or clay or loam.

What constraints do you have with regards to surrounding businesses and / or housing and worst of all Local government regulations plus the bureaucrats / idiocrats who enforce them?
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 22:10

@Kev86

I don't really think it's a case of scepticism. It's more a case of logic; NO sun - NO power, NO wind - NO power. Your statement "hell eliminate it" is an impossibility. You will still be required to be connected to the grid in either case. You could "significantly reduce this bill"......but at a cost!

I work in a smallish club, our monthly power bill is ~$12,500/month. Before the CT, this was around $10,500 - $11,000/month.

Recently, the club's CEO approached a solar power company to get a quote on fitting solar panels to the club.....the quote came to around $1mill!......needless to say, we are still paying....~$12,500/month.

Being a smallish club, I have a good working relationship with the CEO (I was also on the board of the club before I started working for it), and I happened to mention to her, "do you know of, or have you heard about this?" (I must do a follow-up and find out if she made any enquires).

Maybe approach your local MP and find out the 'ins-and-outs' of the grants.

Just a suggestion.


Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/02/2013 23:28

@ Kev 86 .

PM me with details of your Business . As ROM suggested .

Then once i give you the best option's for your needs follow up with Mechanical Services Electricians with experience in your field that also have qualifications in Energy Efficiency Programs / courses , and or a comprehensive list of Prior works carried out in such field . They will need to have affiliated Plumbing contacts and work in with your existing Maintenance Staff/ contractor to create a AIM/ scope of works which will target firstly the Highest energy drawing process/ equipment , then look at age of said equipment and try to start larger and older equipment in replacing/ upgrading parts of your installation .

Solar PV , HW and maybe wind might be an option . At a guess , energy recovery or crossovers/ consolidation of processes can be very beneficial . Diversity can be gained in some instances , instead of multiple units doing the same thing , centralising plants and then arterial feeds really help . The real aim is to cut out wastage . Even process manipulation can help . Realistically though you'll need to give more inference to exactly your setup .
You may end up using people that you first dismissed . But i wouldn't go out to whoever is trying to do individual installs , or a sales team that you have already suggested that makes you uneasy .

Its best to lay out and budget your way through it with well established companies that have started to move into renewables , as opposed to a company that's all renewables ( main asset is to know the ins and outs of the Government teat ) and are trying to establish itself a experienced company .

Either way , take the time to describe your set-up ( take some time and even write it together with help of colleagues in different parts of the business ( if its multiple ) and I will then take the time free of charge to give you some ideas on where to start and if i know the area possible contractors .

regards

Pete.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 09/02/2013 07:38

If it is heating and cooling of buildings I was thinking of the passive heat exchange, large volume fine gravel [ stone ] silo type of air conditioning which need some sophistication in it's controls but only really needs a decent internal ducting system in the buildings and fans to either draw air through the gravel or return air to the the gravel volume for cooling or heating so the power needs are very reduced compared to aircon.
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 09/02/2013 11:59

Here,s a interesting paper on the famous North Sea Wind Farm photo as seen on page 11 of the Alternative Energy Scam? thread.

Abstract: The aim of the paper is to examine the nowadays well-known wind farm wake photographs taken on 12 February 2008 at the offshore Horns Rev 1 wind farm. The meteorological conditions are described from observations from several satellite sensors quantifying clouds, surface wind vectors and sea surface temperature as well as ground-based information at and near the wind farm, including Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) data. The SCADA data reveal that the case of fog formation occurred 12 February 2008 on the 10:10 UTC. The fog formation is due to very special atmospheric conditions where a layer of cold humid air above a warmer sea surface re-condensates to fog in the wake of the turbines. The process is fed by warm humid air up-drafted from below in the counter-rotating swirl generated by the clock-wise rotating rotors. The condensation appears to take place primarily in the wake regions with relatively high axial velocities and high turbulent kinetic energy. The wind speed is near cut-in and most turbines produce very little power. The rotational pattern of spiraling bands produces the large-scale structure of the wake fog.

End

Note on the question of pressure pulses/areas in turbine wake.

Extract

The pressure drop in the wake from the DES simulation is found to have its maximum value very close to the rotor. The pressure increases downwind with the relatively lowest pressure remaining at hub height behind the nacelle but at a distance of 1 rotor diameter the pressure depression is modest. The pressure drop near the tip of blades is localized and the pressure quickly increases downwind

End

http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/2/696
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 09/02/2013 16:58

Thats the exact description of the atmospheric conditions needed for the pressure wake of the turbines to condense the very high water vapour atmosphere and create those turbulent wake fog lines down wind from each turbine.
There's no argument in that.

But the photo does provide a vivid visual example of just how much turbulence is generated by the turbines and just how far those large wind turbine effects can actually travel and still have not dispersed.

Something that can be seen sometimes with aircraft wing tip vortices also and particularly when aircraft go supersonic and the shock wave pressure changes abruptly lower pressures behind certain parts of the aircraft causing water vapour to condense out.

And the pressure pulses are not necessarily confined to downwind as SO pointed out, there are interactions. reflections and refractions of the blade's pressure pulses from the tower and possibly terrain as well atmospheric conditions and no doubt a host of other so far undocumented effects from the turbine blades.

Hopefully we will see some results from the SA Waterloo EPA study in the next few months.

For a saving of only about 9% in CO2 emissions [ a lower figure is given in a dutch paper with one example showing an actual increase in CO2 emmissions from some turbines and their fossil fueled back up running reserves when the back up running reserve power generator emmissions are taken into account.]
And all at collossal public and consumer financial expense.

I am surprised that anybody would want to continue to support wind turbines unless it is on purely non science, ideological based grounds.
Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 09/02/2013 19:19

Fox Business reporter states that solar will never work in the USA because it 'isn't as sunny as Germany'
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 00:26

PMSL and these people are the ones dictating public opinions on every subject including cAGW?
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 01:04

"But the photo does provide a vivid visual example of just how much turbulence is generated by the turbines and just how far those large wind turbine effects can actually travel and still have not dispersed."

Exactly ROM turbulence has the greatest range of effect after sound. Ive found ranges for turbulence returning to laminar flow at between 8 to 16 turbine blade diameters(0.8km to 1.6km @ 100meter blade diameter).
Can we assume that any atmospheric pressure fluctuation,or pulse if you like would cease once laminar flow has been restored & local winds & terrain take over?
If we can rule out atmospheric pressure waves,pulses & wind turbulence as effecting a resident at 2km, we are left with sound.

So infrasound is the only candidate we are left with for a cause of symptoms reported.
The EPA needs to do a thorough job on this, in side & outside of homes & settle this one way or the other.

When you speak of pressure pulses in relation to SO's post are you referring to a pulse of atmospheric pressure?
Or are we taking about a acoustic pulse,sound pressure wave, a sound wave.
Is that what you mean?
I assume you mean acoustic.In relation to OS,s post yes there would be sound reflections from the tower with each blade pass. But there's no such thing as a free lunch.There are no perfect reflectors. With reflections there is always going to be some level of absorption depending on the surface.The source of the sound will be the loudest (the highest sound pressure level) & longest range.
Certainly you can concentrate sound directionally for a gain in sound pressure level.
But you lose that gain from any area outside that directional axis. Im thinking megaphone.
While its not impossible for conditions of terrain produce a directional gain it would not be that common.
Does the spatial distribution of complaints indicate some form of terrain induced amplification?

The EPA should pay some attention to that as well.

I was thinking about the swoosh in SO's post. At the distances he was from the blades doppler would have played a role.
If the air flow over a blade is continuous the sound that the flow produces from the blade would also be continuous.
So standing say 100 meters from the base of the turbine a blade descends down which is brining it closer to you on the ground. So the sound from that blade is getting louder, but the pitch of the sound is also rising,Doppler.
The blade reaches the tower & closest to you, the loudness & pitch peaks. The blade ascends, the loudness & pitch falls as the blade moves up & away.The next blade is
descending & the pattern continues with the beat or pulse set by the turbine RPM.
The swoosh sound is shaped by Doppler. ssww=pitch rising, ooo=pitch peaking, sshh=pitch falling.
The sound loudness(sound pressure level) follows the same pattern, because it gets closer then farther away from you.
If you were 100m away, but up in the air at the same distance above the blades as you were on the ground you would experience the same effect but in reverse.
I suspect it would be a continuous sound if you were up there level with the axis of the hub.
We need to get SO up the to check it out next time he's working at a turbine.
I'm only speculating from a Audiophile knowledge base & this is like trying to untangle a birds nest in fishing line with wielding gloves on.
So these are my guesses for tonight's amateur hour.

Oh yes energy ideology. Wind farms I can take them or leave them & yes they could turn out to be a total wast of money. But relics of the collapse of civilisation like Easter Island? We already have better potential candidates than wind turbines.
Personally I would prefer to this money thrown in a hat with other like minded nations & go for the Fusion end game.But I feel the energy barons of the world would not want to see it happen while they still have plenty of stock on the shelf.
But Im one of those dreamers & I blame that on NASA & as a child watching as Neil Armstrong stepped on to the moon.
But if we want Fusion now anything less than a moon shot on steroids is doomed to drag on for decades. But....

"Given the desire to do it humans can accomplish almost anything"
Jim Lovell
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 09:46

This near 75 year old is fairly tired after running round an aerodrome for the last week helping with a gliding competition so I won't expand on anything much for the moment but Crookhaven River re Fusion, I'm all for it big time and the sooner the better.

Unfortunately for Fusion research so far, the promise is that it will be about 20 years into the future before they master it and that has been the claims for the last 30 or 40 years.

It is just as likely that another form of energy generation will just come out of the wood work completely unexpectedly.
As examples there are a number of cold fusion projects underway although whether this is another dead end might take another decade or so to work out.

Again this was all debated at length in some previous posts a few months ago.

In the meantime as an interim measure until Fusion or another power generation source is developed thats suited to the very high concentrated production / useage of power that our civilisation and society and it's technology and industry now needs lets just get on with Thorium reactors.
The Chinese are expanding on the American thorium reactor technology from the 1950's and 60's. The Indians have a major thorium reactor research project underway with the view to getting commercial thorium reactors up and running within the next couple of decades.
The Americans are now also reviving their thorium reactor research and the Europeans have just loaded the European nuclear research reactor in Norway with thorium rods to get data for future thorium reactor designs.

On infrasound and etc from wind turbines, any surmisation of where the health affecting effects are being generated which can only be from the turbine blades and therefore are pressure and acoustic in nature ill have to wait until the EPA has done these tests at Waterloo and even then those results will be severely challenged particularly if they are to the detriment of the wind industry as there is so much money at stake, particularly public tax payers money .

For without massive public subsidies forever into the far future, the wind industry is completely non viable commercially and will just die and we the public will be left to clean up the mess while the former executives of the wind companies enjoy life on their diesel powered floating gin palaces.

The full article from Saturday's Australian is now available on line.

World's eyes will be on Waterloo as wind turbines go on trial

Quote:
EPA science and assessment director Peter Dolan says monitoring will start in April and continue uninterrupted for two months.

The EPA will use its powers to compel the wind turbine operator to turn its turbines on and off so that background noise can be accurately measured. And it will use very sensitive, and expensive, equipment to measure sound frequencies as low as 0.25 hertz.

Dolan is quick to point out the EPA will not make any judgment on whether wind turbines cause health problems. This will be left to the National Health and Medical Research Council, which is due to release another review of published literature next month.

But the Waterloo tests will provide information on what is really going on acoustically.

"Something is happening and we are trying our best to figure out what it is," Dolan says. "I certainly believe people are affected by something.

"There are some theories around that it is not infrasound but low-frequency noise, but something is affecting people for certain. They are not making it up."


Wind farm opponents in Australia believe the EPA may be able to find some clues in a recent study conducted at the Shirley wind farm in Wisconsin in the US.

Following complaints similar to those in Waterloo, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission engaged four acoustic consulting firms to conduct a joint study.

Two of the firms had close links to wind farm developers, one worked for anti-wind farm groups and the fourth worked for both.

"The four investigating firms are of the opinion that enough evidence and hypotheses have been given herein to classify LFN and infrasound as a serious issue, possibly affecting the future of the industry," the joint study concluded.

"It should be addressed beyond the present practice of showing that wind turbine levels are magnitudes below the threshold of hearing at low frequencies."

The acoustic companies highlighted 1986 research by the US Navy, which found physical vibration of pilots in flight simulators induced motion sickness.

The Shirley report also challenged the theory that the health impacts are psychosomatic, or a so-called "nocebo" effect.

"The fact that residents largely report wind turbines as inaudible, and the reported effects on a baby, seem to rule out the illness being caused by extreme annoyance, as some have suggested," the report says. "The lack of change with orientation of the turbine with respect to the house and the lack of change with position in the house suggest that we are dealing with very low frequencies."


The wind industry has avoided the Shirley report and sought to downplay the significance of the new EPA research in Australia.


[ more>> ]


Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 10:06

OOPs! Sorry but I don't know how News Ltd works it's paywall as a few minutes ago I got the full article on the EPA's Waterloo wind farm tests.
Now I get paywalled again. Perhaps they allow one view only. Maybe cancelling the articles cookies might get the full article again.
Posted by: Crookhaven River

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 10:23

Fair enough ROM we'll retire to the bar on this one & wait for the numbers to come in.
Take it easy.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/02/2013 10:32

Doing the usual Google trick should do it.

Google, World's eyes will be on Waterloo as wind turbines go on trial and open 1st link.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 12:46

These people knew – and did nothing

Remember these faces. Burn them into your memory.

Long after the Royal Commission (we’re certain there will be one*), long after the books and documentaries and newspaper articles, long after the PhD theses, remember one thing.

These people knew. They were told. And they did nothing.

They chose to ignore that an industry was receiving government support to propagate a technology that made people sick. They actively supported that industry for their own political careers.

Before the Brumby government was wiped out in the 2010 Victorian election, it gave ministerial approval to a slew of wind farms in a frantic (and futile) attempt to hang onto power through the green vote.

http://stopthesethings.com/2013/02/10/these-people-knew-and-did-nothing/
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 13:37

From Simmo's post above;

http://stopthesethings.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/dr-iser-submission.pdf

Can one possibly even grasp the public, the political and MSM uproar, the furor, the accusations and outright and savage legal reprisals and the entire shut down of their industry if that same group of surveyed people, possibly all farming families or farmers and rural people had produced and sold food which when eaten made 15%, three out of every twenty people continuously ill and another 25% very uncomfortable including regular sleep deprivation and did so without let up for months and years?

The utter hypocrisy exhibited by the wind industry promoting politicians, greens and MSM is beyond breathtaking.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 13:44

...and all based on a survey by one doctor without a shred of evidence that the reported serious health problems in just three people were caused by wind turbines.

Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 13:56

.......
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 13:59

Oh is this another Lewandowski survey then CB?

No of course not this was conducted by a GP of 25 real people of which 20 responded. A very small sample and not terribly significant if you take just the 3 people who reported major health problems but then another 5 reported mild health problems. So just under half of the respondents reported problems and the author says that further investigations are needed. Not a bad result when you think about it. No fiddling of data, no changing the questions after the survey and no angst from either side - so far. Just a conculusion that more investigations need to be conducted. I can't find any faults with that.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 15:05

The survey is flawed for obvious reasons.

A few people develop health problems.

They blame those problems on wind turbines when in all probability those health problems are completely unrelated.

Here's a possible scenario.

Some wind turbines are built up on a hill several Km's away.

Farmer Joe uses harmful chemicals in his farm work.

Farmer Joe develops health issues.

Farmer Joe gets this survey from a Doctor and blames his health issues on wind turbines.

Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 18:01

No the survey is flawed in your eyes because the result isn't what you expected - take as it was conducted - it wasn't a rigourous investigation that was meant to be published in a peer reviewed medical journal or anything else - it was a local GP asking patients questions via a survey because he cares for his patients and their health - something that my GP does on a fairly regular basis too as it happens. No not about wind turbines but about all sorts of things like diabetes education, smoking questionaires, how many clients are ex military, PTSD treatment plans, have I every had malaria etc.

It is called old fashioned health care CB. Something you may never have experienced but there is a minority of health professionals who actually participate in proactively looking after their patients.

As an example of proactive health care I suggest you Google Dr Trevor Beard and his eradication program he ran in Tasmania.
Posted by: George M

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/02/2013 18:40

Re #1171492, "A very small sample and not terribly significant if you take just the 3 people who reported major health problems but then another 5 reported mild health problems. So just under half of the respondents reported problems and the author says that further investigations are needed. Not a bad result when you think about it."

For a survey, a rule of thumb for the Margin of Error in that survey is given by 1/sq.rt.(No of respondents). For a sample size of 20, the margin of error is 22.4% i.e. there is a 77.6% chance of Dr. Iser's sample survey results differing from the actual health situation for the people living near the wind trubines. So the doctor's results of 3 respondents with major health problems and 5 respondents with minor health problems has a 22.4% confidence level. If the doctor repeated the survey with a different group of respondents, there is a 22.4% chance of getting the same result for major and minor health problems.

For the doctor to get to the 95% confidence level would require around 400 respondents. It's a bit more complicated when you factor in the size of the population affected by the wind turbines, response rate and types of survey questions but the 400 figure is in the general area statistics-wise. I notice that Dr. Iser did not state how he selected the 25 individuals to whom he mailed his survey. It further weakens the confidence level of the survey if he did not randomly select them from those who lived near wind turbines. After a casual read of the Dr's submission to the government, it's not clear if he surveyed his own patients which, if he did, would make his survey results questionable.
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/02/2013 08:39

Debatable in health issues, maybe, but shocking visual pollution of the beautiful country environment for sure! And we can do it much better than this and much more efficiently also!
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/02/2013 09:34

And again GM you missed the point of the survey - it was for the doctor to gauge what, if any health problems he could expect from the wind turbines and what steps he would have to take, if any, to help people with the reulting problems.

He wasn't conducting an earth shattering in depth investigation to change world opinion on wind turbines, nor for it to be used as anything by anyone as fuel for the debate either for or against.

That it has been lept all over as either a flawed survey (it isn't and never was supposed to be a rigorous investigation on health claims) or as a proof that wind turbines cause health problems (it hasn't, by it self, either proved or disproved anything) and it's use by either side should be discounted for the flaws that everyone including myself have already stated.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/02/2013 09:43

George M , if you asked 19 people of your acquaintance if the flu virus was affecting them and three said yes, they had a constant fever, couldn't sleep and needed medication because it was pretty bad,
Five said they had the sniffles and sometimes felt quite miserable and the other dozen said they were OK, would you need a full survey of hundreds of people by some highly paid survey outfit before you came to the conclusion that there was a severe flu virus infection in the community?
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/02/2013 10:27

And i will add; If you were a Doctor, would you be fullfilling your role of a Doctor responsible to his / her patients and your community if you just ignored what you had found and failed to inform the authorities about your findings and ask for some action to be taken on the problem?
Posted by: George M

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/02/2013 00:01

Re #1171603 "… if you asked 19 people of your acquaintance if the flu virus was affecting them … would you need a full survey of hundreds of people by some highly paid survey outfit before you came to the conclusion that there was a severe flu virus infection in the community?"

To answer your question, based on 19 people, the only conclusion I'd come to would involve the people of my acquaintance otherwise I'd be generalising. To help me make a conclusion about my local community, I'd ask a friendly community pharmacist. If I was the District Medical Officer for West Gippsland, I'd … read on or skip to the last paragraph.

Drawing conclusions about health concerns based on one's experiences needs to be placed in context. As an example, a flu "epidemic" passing among the occupants of secure dementia ward doesn't definitely mean that there is a flu epidemic or a high incidence of flu in the general community. The flu would have been introduced into the secure ward by either a visitor to the ward or a staff member. The close proximity of the occupants in the secure ward ensures that most of them, including the staff working in the ward, will contract the flu as might visitors to the secure ward. The high incidence of flu within the ward does not necessarily reflect the flu incidence within the outside community.

The actual survey carried out by Dr. Iser is simplistic and can be criticised on a number of different levels. Responses were limited to Yes/No when good survey design would also indicate the inclusion of Don't know. The survey uses leading questions e.g. "Do you feel that your health has been adversely affected since the erection of the turbines?". This encourages respondents who were originally against the installation of the turbines to answer 'Yes' and the converse would be true also. Worse though is that surely Dr. Iser knows his patients well enough to detect any changes in their health issues when they present at his surgery. If he is new to the district, a survey of his patients' records for their health histories would indicate any changes in patients' health indicators that occurred at the time of the wind turbine installation, etc.

The questions ask the respondent to assess their own health issues e.g. " Do you feel that since living near to a wind turbine/turbines you have experienced excesses of the following symptoms … " Again, a doctor has access to patients' records which include the doctor's notes made at the time of consultations and it seems strange, to me, that Dr. Iser didn't carry out an analysis of his patients' medical histories. Furthermore, several of the symptoms listed on the survey are commensurate with the symptoms for chronic sleep deprivation and combinations of other symptoms are linked with hypertension, hormonal imbalance, etc. So the epidemiology required to find a causal relationship between those symptoms and wind turbine syndrome has to first eliminate other health conditions as being the root cause of the cited problems.

A sub-question in the Idser survey asks: '(If you have experienced excesses of the above symptoms) Have you approached your doctor regarding these symptoms? Yes/No". If the respondent answers Yes they are asked to state any Tests and/or Treatment they received from the doctor. For Dr. Iser's survey to give reliable results, he would have had to eliminate respondents, on the basis of self diagnosis,etc, who answered Yes to experiencing excessive symptoms since living near wind turbines but answered No to seeing a doctor about them. Similarly, Dr. Iser would have to eliminate respondents with degenerative conditions from those who were affected by the wind turbines, on the grounds of being unable to separate the degenerative effect from any possible wind turbine syndrome effect without testing the respondent further. Had Dr. Iser asked respondents if they had any existing conditions prior to the wind turbine installations, he may have been able to get around this problem. He didn't.

There are some other general issues with Dr. Iser's survey e.g. a question should have been included in the survey to identify the respondents' attitudes towards wind turbines before they were installed. Overseas studies show that people's attitudes towards the installation and use of wind turbines in their neighbourhood is a major predictor in their contracting "wind turbine syndrome". The Idser survey does indirectly ask people what their attitude is post wind turbine installation by asking them if their quality of life has been altered.

In a letter addressed to the local council, Dr. Idser may have identified the cause of the wind turbine problems when he stated "1. Wind turbines do lead to noise annoyance … causing insomnia, stress and anxiety. 2. The feeling of powerlessness, financial loss and (community) division is a major cause of stress and anxiety."

But there still remains the vexing question: Why didn't Dr. Iser carry out an analysis of all his patients' health records, for those living near the wind turbines, to try and identify a discernible change in their medical conditions that coincided with the installation and operation of the turbines? He could have extended that analysis by involving other medical health officers. I know that's what I would have done if I was their doctor and was carrying out my repsonsibilities towards my patients' welfares before alerting the Director General of the Health Department, the Government Chief Medical Officer, etc. And if I did carry out a survey, I would have prepared a better survey or got better advice on how to do it, and surveyed a lot more people. That way, if it did confirm there was a problem, the survey's results would have carried more weight and been less easy to ignore.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 06:54


Surge in global wind power capacity

WIND power expanded by almost 20 per cent in 2012 around the world to reach a new peak of 282 gigawatts (GW) of total installed capacity. Of the 45GW of new wind turbines that arrived in 2012, China and the US led the way with 13GW each, while Germany, India and the UK were next with about 2GW apiece.

“While China paused for breath, both the US and European markets had exceptionally strong years,” said Steve Sawyer, secretary general of the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC), which produced the statistics. “Asia still led global markets, but with North America a close second, and Europe not far behind.”

The UK now ranks sixth in the world for installed wind power, with 8.5GW. In Europe, only Germany (31GW) and Spain (23GW) have more. China leads the world with 77GW installed and the US is second with 60GW.

The UK is by far the world leader in offshore wind deployment, installing 0.85 megawatts in 2012 to bring the total so far to 3GW. Denmark has a total of 0.9GW installed; Belgium is ranked third with 0.4GW.

“We’re also driving the technology forward with innovative 6MW offshore turbines currently being installed in the North Sea,” said a spokeswoman for the UK department of energy and climate change.

http://dawn.com/2013/02/13/surge-in-global-wind-power-capacity/
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 06:58


Bumper year for solar and wind energy

2012 was another bumper year for renewable energy worldwide with solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity surpassing 100 gigawatts for the first time and wind energy capacity expanding by almost one-fifth.

Rapid growth outside Europe saw a total of about 32 GW of solar PV capacity installed, bringing capacity to 101 GW and narrowly pipping the 30 gigawatts taken up in 2011, the European Photovoltaic Industry Association said, citing preliminary figures.

"No one would have predicted even 10 years ago that we would see more than 100 GW of solar photovoltaic capacity in the world by 2012,” said EPIA President Winfried Hoffmann. “The photovoltaic industry clearly faces challenges but the results of 2012 show there is a strong global market for our technology.

Solar photovoltaic plants can now generate as much electricity in a year as about 16 mid-sized coal-fired or nuclear power stations, the lobby group said.

Australian surge

Australia added about 1 GW of solar PV capacity last year, lifting the country's capacity about 70 per cent to 2.4 GW, according to the Australian Solar Council.

The wholesale price of solar PV is now as low as 55 cents per watt of power, down from an average of $7 in 2008, said John Grimes, chief executive of the Australian Solar Council.

With some consumers in NSW, for instance, paying more than 50 cents per kilowatt-hour for peak power, solar energy is becoming "an absolute no-brainer," Mr Grimes said. "The fundamental economics are now driving the uptake of solar, rather than government support."

link
Posted by: LittleDavey83

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 11:11

I see you cut that second article short, CeeBee. What it goes on to say is this:
Quote:
Policy uncertainty remains, though, with the government now considering a recommendation by the Climate Change Authority in its review of the Renewable Energy Target to cut the size of commercial PV installations eligible for the small-scale solar scheme from 100 to 10-kilowatt capacity.

"That would be an enormous brake on the take-up of solar in commercial and industry areas'' if accepted by the government, and curb job growth in a sector already employing about 25,000 people, Mr Grimes said.

The crash in solar PV prices has largely been prompted by Chinese producers flooding the market with low-cost panels. The expansion of the global market came even as new European capacity slumped amid subsidy cuts by governments.


That would lead me to believe the major factor propping up the industry is government money. Let's read on:
Quote:

A rush by wind farm developers in the US to beat an anticipated expiration of the US Production Tax Credit saw the country install more than 8 GW of capacity in the final three months of 2012 alone.

Europe set a record with 12.4 GW of wind energy added, as markets such as Sweden, Romania, Italy and Poland posted quicker growth.

The outlook remains uncertain, though, as the region's on-going sovereign debt crises limits government support, the council said.


Hmmm...I see a trend here!! Government money funding expansion in renewables. What do other articles linked to in that one say? From Call for curbs on solar energy spread:
Quote:

Under the current settings, the (federal government's) renewable energy target is projected to cost households between $12 and $64 extra a year. The agency (Climate Change Authority) suggested a change to the definition of what counts as "large-scale" to prevent the costs rising.

One element of the target, involving small-scale renewable energy such as rooftop solar photovoltaic panels, remains uncapped. The authority recommended changes to the settings to prevent costs blowing out if commercial buyers were to match the rapid take-up of solar PV seen in the residential sector.

"It's really to head off the possibility of there being a real boom in commercial solar installations," Climate Change Authority chairman Bernie Fraser said.

If such installations remained within the small-scale category they "could potentially be quite expensive", he said.

As a result, solar PV installations of more than 10-kilowatt capacity may become part of the large-scale renewable energy portion, which is capped at 41,000 gigawatt-hours by 2020, the authority said.

"This effectively strikes out more than 90 per cent of the available commercial market," said Rob Grant, chief executive of Mark Group, one of Australia's biggest solar PV installers.


Say what?? I thought solar was "becoming a no-brainer" due to cheap cost, relying on "fundamental economics rather than government support"?? I also thought the government was encouraging the use of renewable energy? Why then are they trying to cripple the industry?

Quote:

Australian Solar Council chief executive John Grimes said the recommended change would hurt the industry.

"The proposal to move solar systems above 10 kilowatts into the large-scale renewable energy target will significantly undermine investor certainty and lead to business plans being ripped up," Mr Grimes said.

"We need to encourage larger power users to invest in solar and this [recommendation] will be a backward step."

Australia's households have been adding solar panels to their roofs at the rate of 300,000 or more a year, with demand fuelled in part by state feed-in tariffs, which are mostly being wound back.

As residential demand plateaus or declines, the solar industry had been looking to commercial users, such as shopping centres and warehouses, to pick up the slack.


Ahhh I see...the facts are slightly different to those being portrayed...
Quote:

In fact, on current projections, renewable energy's share of the electricity market may rise as high as 26 per cent by 2020, in part because higher prices are leading to a drop in demand from families and businesses alike.


Wow. So the percentage share of renewables is rising because demand is dropping, due to the high costs as a result (in part) of the rising precentage share... Positive feedback, anyone??? Meanwhile we, the consumer, get slugged for it.


So let's recap. Government subsidies are fuelling renewable expansion worldwide, and where subsidies are being wound back we see a clear rush to get in first, with dwindling expansion afterwards. These renewables now allegedly represent value for money and are roughly on par with traditional energy sources, but the higher costs are leading to a discernable drop in demand.

I think it's fair to say the 'bumper year' is almost entirely government-funding-driven; and claims that renewables represent a cost-effective solution are rejected by hard data showing a reduction in energy usage which is partly as a result of the expansion in renewables.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 11:43

You seem to have confused things a bit. The sentence you bolded:

"higher prices are leading to a drop in demand from families and businesses alike"

The higher prices are for electricity, not renewable energy and the drop in demand is for electricity, not renewable energy.

This is worth highlighting:

"The wholesale price of solar PV is now as low as 55 cents per watt of power, down from an average of $7 in 2008, said John Grimes, chief executive of the Australian Solar Council."

Wow!, that's an impressive drop in price in just 5 years. I expect the price of renewable energy will continue to drop as energy from traditional sources will just keep on rising.


Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 12:27

Woohoo 101GW of capacity. And how much was actually produced of that capacity?

4 to 10% if your lucky. Capacity means nothing if you can't get it to where it is needed, when it is needed and in a cost effective manner.

I just saw a Wikipedia spreadsheet that showed that 478 wind turbines have been abanonded around Australia, now who do you think is picking up the tab to remove them? Yep the tax payers of Australia.

meanwhile the lurkers might be interested in this http://reneweconomy.com.au/2012/fourteen-wind-energy-myths-debunked-97695 14 wind energy myths debunked.
Posted by: LittleDavey83

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 13:20

I'll humour you CeeBee. Where does electricity come from? A portion of our electricity is generated via renewable energy sources (hydro, wind, PV, etc). An increase in the price of generation will obviously cause an increase in the price of electricity for the consumer. You may have missed this: "Under the current settings, the (federal government's) renewable energy target is projected to cost households between $12 and $64 extra a year" - through our electricity bills. Any drop in demand for electricity is a drop in demand for all electrical energy - renewables included. I'm not sure what distinction you are trying to make here.

The articles make it very clear that renewables cannot compete (price-wise) with existing electricity generation which is fully paid off.

I notice you ignored the majority of my post showing that government subsidies are a large source of funding for the renewable market worldwide, and growth in renewables is severely curtailed when these subsidies are reduced or removed.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/02/2013 13:39

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Australia

Scroll down to the table named Installed and proposed capacity by state. My figure was incorrect it isn't 478 abandoned turbines it is 477 and they haven't been built they are actually "Proposed Projects' Publicly Announced Status" which have been abandoned. The taxpayer inputs are still there though as each project is subsidies by we taxpayers.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/02/2013 20:49

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance - (BNEF):

Renewable energy now cheaper than new fossil fuels in Australia

Sydney, 7 February 2013 – Unsubsidised renewable energy is now cheaper than electricity from new-build coal- and gas-fired power stations in Australia, according to new analysis from research firm Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

The study shows that electricity can be supplied from a new wind farm at a cost of AUD 80/MWh (USD 83), compared to AUD 143/MWh from a new coal plant or AUD 116/MWh from a new baseload gas plant, including the cost of emissions under the Gillard government’s carbon pricing scheme. However even without a carbon price (the most efficient way to reduce economy-wide emissions) wind energy is 14% cheaper than new coal and 18% cheaper than new gas.



Did the BNEF really do any research on this study?

Australian Energy Market Operator.

Id' like to draw your attention to the 1st graph (Electricity Price & Demand - top RHS). Note SA & Vic. These 2 States have the highest total Capacity for Wind In Australia. NSW & QLD rely on coal fired power, Tassie relies heavily on hydro. (graph updates every 30 mins).



Interesting hey.

p.s. All prices CT inclusive.



Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/02/2013 21:02

Also note the total demand @ 19:00 hrs.

27,583.48 MW
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 17/03/2013 20:47


Research Finds Wind Farm Health Concerns Probably Caused By Anti-Wind Scare Campaigns

ANTI-WIND farm activists around the world have created a silent bogeyman they claim can cause everything from sickness and headaches to herpes, kidney damage and cancers.

This "infrasound" exists at frequencies too low for the human ear to detect but is present almost everywhere from offices and roadsides to waves tumbling on ocean beaches. These low frequencies can crawl menacingly from the back of your kitchen fridge or from your heart beating.

Despite the ubiquitous nature of infrasound, anti-wind farm groups such as Australia's Waubra Foundation like people to think that it's only inaudible infrasound from wind turbines which might send residents to their sick beds.

But two new studies suggest the cause of health complaints by people living near wind farms could in fact be down to the scare campaign of the anti-wind groups and reports about such scares in the media.

The first study Can Expectations Produce Symptoms From Infrasound Associated With Wind Turbines? was published earlier this month in Health Psychology - a journal of the American Psychological Association.

The researchers from the University of Auckland in New Zealand wanted to find out if simply exposing people to warnings that turbines might make you ill was enough to cause them to report typical symptoms such as headaches and nausea.

Using 54 people, the researchers showed half the group five minutes of footage of people complaining that wind farms had made them ill. Some of the footage was taken from this Australian Broadcasting Corporation report (watch it here) into "Waubra disease" where residents were filmed complaining about a wind farm at Waubra in Victoria. Footage was also taken from this CTV Network report from Canada about a wind farm in Ontario.

This group was called the "high expectancy group" because the information they were given had led them to expect they might experience certain symptoms if exposed to infrasound. The other half of the group was shown interviews with experts stating that the science showed infrasound could not directly cause health problems.

The researchers then told each person they were going to be exposed to two 10-minute periods of infrasound in a special acoustic room when, in fact, for one of those periods they would be exposed to no sound at all, or "sham infrasound" as the researchers describe it. So what happened?

The response from the "high expectancy" group was to report that the "infrasound" had caused them to experience more symptoms which were more intense. This was the case whether they were exposed to sham infrasound or genuine infrasound. The report explains that "the number of symptoms reported and the intensity of the symptom experienced during listening sessions were not affected by exposure to infrasound but were influenced by expectancy group allocation."

In the low expectancy group, the infrasound and sham infrasound had little to no effect. In other words, the study found that if a person is told that wind turbines will make them ill then they are likely to report symptoms, regardless of whether they are exposed to infrasound or not.

Clearly, this points the finger at anti-wind farm campaigns as a potential cause of people's symptoms, rather than "infrasound" from turbines. The research added: "The importance of findings in this study is that symptom expectations were created by viewing TV material readily available on the Internet, indicating the potential for such expectations to be created outside of the laboratory in real-world settings."

Writing about her research on The Conversation, lead author Fiona Crichton says

The findings indicate that negative health information readily available to people living in the vicinity of wind farms has the potential to create symptom expectations, providing a possible pathway for symptoms attributed to operating wind turbines. This may have wide-reaching implications. If symptom expectations are the root cause of symptom reporting, answering calls to increase minimum wind-farm set back distances is likely to do little to assuage health complaints.

Reading some news reports (such as those offered by The Australian newspaper's environment editor Graham Lloyd or anti-wind activist and UK anti-wind columnist James Delingpole) and material from anti-wind farm groups, it might seem that health complaints are common among people living near turbines.

But an as yet unpublished study (and therefore not peer-reviewed) just released by Simon Chapman, the Professor of Public Health at the University of Sydney, suggests only a tiny proportion of people living near turbines do actually complain and, when they do, the complaints coincide with campaigning from anti-wind groups.

Chapman looked at health complaints made by residents living within 5 kilometres of all 49 wind farms operating in Australia between 1993 and 2012. After reviewing media reports, public inquiries and complaints to wind companies themselves, Chapman found evidence of only 120 individuals having actually complained - representing about 1 in 272 people living near wind farms.

But significantly, Chapman found that 81 of those 120 residents were living beside just five wind farms "which have been heavily targeted by anti wind farm groups". What's more, some 82 per cent of all the complaints had occured since 2009 when Chapman says anti-wind farm groups began to push the health scare as part of their opposition to turbines.

Some 31 of the 49 wind farms studied had never been subjected to a complaint either about noise or health.

"The 31 farms with no histories of complaints, and which today have some 21,530 residents within 5km of their turbines have operated for a cumulative total of 256 years," says Chapman's report. In Chapman's research, he says that anxiety among residents increases as media reports spread the stories of health concerns and as researchers start investigating.

One down side to this research is, of course, that it tells anti-wind farm groups that by concentrating on unproven health concerns, their campaigns can illicit a steady flow of complaints and negative sentiment from communities.

link
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 17/03/2013 20:50


Study finds Wind Turbine Sickness as real as Monckton’s HIV cure

Wind farm proponents were shocked to the core yesterday as The Age revealed alleged “Wind Turbine Sickness”, a condition mostly afflicting easily suggestible old coots, is psychosomatic i.e. all in their heads.

More shockingly, the study found that:

…68 per cent of the 120 complaints that have been made came from residents living near wind farms heavily targeted by the anti-wind farm lobby, and that ”the advent of anti-wind farm groups beginning to foment concerns about health (from around 2009) was also strongly correlated with actual complaints being made”.

Say it ain’t so!

Thankfully, the Liberal Party is not abandoning its core demographic of gullible twits who need to be told what to think:

But the Coalition has said that if it is elected in September it will hold another ”expert” inquiry into wind farm noise.

Probably right after their expert inquires into dowsing, Peter Brock’s car crystals and whether Stephen Conroy is actually the living reincarnation of Stalin.

http://roymustard.wordpress.com/2013/03/...ktons-hiv-cure/
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 17/03/2013 21:40

ROFLMAO

Your 2nd 'article' CeeBee is quoting from a yet to be published, therefore not peer reviewed, study.

Alarmism at it's finest.... evillaugh



Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 17/03/2013 22:05

You mean this Prof Simon Chapman?

The first thing to note is, he doesn't have a medically related qualification, nor specialize in hearing and hearing disorders, nor is he an acoustic engineer.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 17/03/2013 22:56

While on the subject of Waubra wind farm.......did you know?

Since 2009, Acciona’s Waubra wind farm in Victoria has been operating as a Clean Energy Regulator accredited energy supplier, allowing it to receive tens of millions of dollars in renewable energy certificates. But to be accredited you must prove that you are compliant and to be compliant you must supply a certificate of compliance from the relevant state authority.

In Victoria, that authority is the Department of Planning and Community Development. That department has advised my office that the Waubra wind farm has not been signed off by the minister on any noise compliance, despite operating for 3½ years. As Acciona has no certificate of compliance it cannot be compliant, cannot qualify for accreditation by the CER and cannot qualify to receive tens of millions of dollars of RECs that it has received to date.

If this is the standard of the accreditation process where energy providers can gain access to billions of dollars of RECs without having to prove compliance, then nothing short of a review of the entire accreditation process and investigation into the ease with which these RECs are distributed will satisfy the Australian public.


Senator Madigan - Thursday 14th March, 2013
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 14:00

ASIC reports record company closures, many blame carbon tax

Quote:
THE carbon tax is contributing to a record number of firms going to the wall with thousands of employees being laid off and companies forced to close factories that have stood for generations.

Soaring energy bills caused by the Government's climate change scheme have been called the "straw that broke the camel's back" by company executives and corporate rescue doctors who are trying to save ailing firms.
...

The Australian Securities & Investments Commission reports there were 10,632 company collapses for the 12 months to March 1 - averaging 886 a month - with the number of firms being placed in administration more than 12 per cent higher than during the global financial crisis


It looks like the Carbin Tax is doing exactly what it's intended to do - kill of what remains of Australian manufacturing and to drive us all into "equal" poverty ... and we can sing solidarity for ever while cooking our home grown "organic" greens over a fire from our milch cows "patties". [Oh hang on - owning a milch cow is enterpreneurial! Look Look a Capitalist!]

Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 14:17

The latest jobs figures directly contradicts all this doom and gloom with Employment increasing by 71,500 last month.

Any factory closures were pretty much all to do with the high Aussie dollar and bad business practises with the owners blaming anything but themselves.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 14:51

......
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 14:53

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
The latest jobs figures directly contradicts all this doom and gloom with Employment increasing by 71,500 last month.


Wouldn't you know it... that 71,500 figure was seasonally adjusted. Wow. In reality, the quantim of the increase was 15.9K. Remind me... when does the public service have its annual induction?

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6202.0
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:11

.....

For a business to fail just from a very small increase in costs due to the price on carbon it shows that the business was poorly run. New businesses will simply take their place with smarter operators.
Posted by: refstar

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:20

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Originally Posted By: ROM
Well it seems like you don't have a job Ceebee judging by the amount of time you spend on this forum so I would guess that those business owners with all their bad business practices must be supporting you with their taxes.

By the way have you EVER actually ran a business long enough to acquire all that know how on what constitutes bad business practices?


For a business to fail just from a very small increase in costs due to the price on carbon it shows that the business was poorly run. New businesses will simply take their place with smarter operators.


This quote epitomizes the ignorance out there about impacts of the Carbon Tax errr Price. The "very small increase" has a cascade affect right across every aspect of the economy as they all rely upon 2 essential ingredients - power and fuel. And whats does the Carbon Tax target - power and fuel.

And it is no small rise either - take for e.g. aviation fuels (gasoline and kerosene). Neither of these are eligible for fuel tax credits. Prior to carbon pricing the rate of excise on aviation (both aviation kerosene and aviation gasoline) was 3.556 cents per litre.

The excise rate for aviation kerosene will rise by 6.604 cents per litre to 10.16 cents per litre in 2014-15, and the excise rate for aviation gasoline will rise by 5.588 cents per litre to 9.144 cents per litre.

The vast majority of fuel used in aviation is aviation kerosene.

That's over a whopping 50% increase on the excise on fuels. You can bet that will be directly passed on to consumers. And that is but one industry.

Whilst the agriculture, forestry and fishery industries will not be included in the carbon pricing scheme, the trucks that transport your goods, supermarket foods etc are as well as cattle trucks. All those costs are being passed directly on.

Then lets start with energy - those costs passed on while big power companies make $$ from the Govts stupid scheme.

Every single cent of these costs makes small business noncompetitive. That's before you add overseas online, Ebay and the unfair GST v International goods arguments.

......
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:24

.....
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:30

Ah yes... the "very small" argument.

For a business to fail global warming to happen just from a very small increase in costs due to the price on in atmospheric carbon it shows that the business climatezience was poorly run ...

Lol

anyhow: http://www.smartcompany.com.au/economy/0...tax-report.html
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:34

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
The latest jobs figures directly contradicts all this doom and gloom with Employment increasing by 71,500 last month.

Any factory closures were pretty much all to do with the high Aussie dollar and bad business practises with the owners blaming anything but themselves.



Well we have a 100% stand alone solar system and all i can say is it craps over mains power, our neighbours have lost power numerous times over the last few months while we have remained "blissfully unaware" that the power was even out.....
And the other great advantage for us (as well as anyone else that has standalone power) is we don't have to fork out handfuls of dollars every few months just for the privilege of having power lines connected to our house (and that is even before you have used any power!)

Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:48

I have to laugh yet again YS
Without all those big coal fired power stations there would be no internet or computers or such other so useful things that you use without thinking, and which you use to tell us all how much "better off" you are with your own" standalone" power.
Posted by: Greg Sorenson

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/03/2013 16:56

I will be locking this for 24 hours, once again personal attacks are the cause. Think very hard about whether you guys want thew CC thread in it's current form, we may have to consider big adjustments if people don't play nicely.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/03/2013 15:56

ROM the only thing that would directly affect me at home would be the phone or internet connection, as with everything else i use at home it is 100% powered by the sun, about a month or so ago when the entire state of Qld’s phones went down it did not bother me, i did notice the modem/internet was out but i just thought that was Telstra again (as they had numerous routing issues previously over the past month.) it was not until the next morning that the internet connection was still out, i thought that it must have been something more...that was until i turned the radio on and found out the entire state from Bundy onwards was down.

I have to laugh every time i hear someone say “oh no! power has gone up AGAIN!, i have just received my power bill and it is over $900....” well for $912 you could easily afford to buy 5 x 250 watt solar panels... and that would go along way to cutting your power consumption and bills. Just think,if you spent $900 per 1/4 over 5 years than that is $18,000 down the drain...
All i can say is don’t knock it unless you have tried it!
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 12:40


In a huge boost for the renewable energy industry skeptic Anthony Watt's urges people to follow his example and switch to solar energy.


link
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 13:19

And again it is one home providing some electricty into the grid, not powering the entire grid by solar power.

Talk about clutching at straws CB read the entire article. He is doing it to offset the huge increases in power costs mandated by the Green environuts to provide renwables and the only way they can do that is to increase basic utility power prices so they can subsidise every milliamp of power being produced by non convential means.

If you had to pay the same prices as they do in California you too would be either moving out of the state or finding some way to offset your mobs cost increases too.
I have been using or lived in homes with solar heating since the late 60's. That doesn't make me a believer in cAGW.
Posted by: GDL

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 13:56

...
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 14:32

...
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 14:36

Originally Posted By: SBT
And again it is one home providing some electricty into the grid, not powering the entire grid by solar power.

Talk about clutching at straws CB read the entire article. He is doing it to offset the huge increases in power costs mandated by the Green environuts to provide renwables and the only way they can do that is to increase basic utility power prices so they can subsidise every milliamp of power being produced by non convential means.

If you had to pay the same prices as they do in California you too would be either moving out of the state or finding some way to offset your mobs cost increases too.
I have been using or lived in homes with solar heating since the late 60's. That doesn't make me a believer in cAGW.


So Anthony went to Solar power because of the cost of electricity. Seems to me that is the whole point of increasing the cost of electricity. People will switch over to renewable energy to save money thereby reducing the amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere. A win win all round.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 14:43

Well thats great CB... He can afford it.... What about those poor barstards who can't afford to live let alone fork out $15,000 to pump up the greens asses????
Oh thats right... The poor aren't as important to society of course. So lets just let them starve out of existence in the dark eh??? Sounds very sinister to me!!!! And in the mean time, Government stooge scientists and politicians, who earn plenty, just leave their lights on... because their electricity bills aren't an issue to their over inflated wages....
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 15:09

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Seems to me that is the whole point of increasing the cost of electricity. People will switch over to renewable energy to save money thereby reducing the amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere. A win win all round.


So this is what you are advocating, promoting and believe should be forced onto people, CeeBee?

Warning wind farm subsidies are pushing Scots into fuel poverty

Quote:
A Scots politician has claimed wind farm subsidies are plunging Scots into fuel poverty.

In a Scottish Government debate on fuel poverty, Mid-Scotland and Fife MSP Murdo Fraser attacked the SNP for its staunch backing of onshore wind projects.

Opponents of the Government policy have claimed the generous grants awarded to wind farm developers have pushed electricity costs through the roof, leaving Scotland with some of the highest energy bills in Europe.

The subsidies were introduced across the UK last year and are expected to have cost up to £1 billion.

They offer a huge benefit to the energy companies as they push ahead with wind power projects but their cost in added on to household bills.

The subsidies are said to be rising faster than inflation, with wages struggling to keep up.

Almost 30% of Scottish residents are being left in fuel poverty and Energy Action Scotland claims the figure could be as high as 40%.

“Each electricity bill has a rapidly increasing levy for paying the subsidies for wind turbines,” Mr Fraser said.

“Every time we hear someone evangelising on behalf of the wind power industry, let us remember it is built on increasing fuel poverty.

“Every time we hear wind farm developers talking about the sums they pay out in community benefit, let us remember every penny of community benefit is being robbed from the public, many of whom can barely afford to heat their homes.

Mr Fraser added: “The Scottish Government must realise the decisions they make on wind energy effects everyone in Scotland, from the rural resident whose community is blighted by these structures, to the urban family who witness a dramatic increase in their heating and lighting bills.”


And this; UK's Mail On line.

Quarter of mothers forced to turn their heating off to afford food for their children: Survey warns of increase in 'fuel poverty'

# Survey finds 56 per cent of families turn heating off when children leave

#Bill increase causing people to use blankets and extra clothing to keep warm

#Experts say number of households suffering fuel poverty will double by 2016


Quote:
Soaring energy bills are forcing one in four mothers to turn off their heating in the depths of winter in order to afford food for their children.
Fuel poverty is resulting in thousands of families resorting to wearing extra clothes and using blankets in their homes.
More than half of families turn off the heating in their houses when the children are out, while 45 per cent of adults keep warm using blankets or duvets during the day, according to a survey.

Fuel bills have already soared by eight per cent this winter, but costs are expected to rise further in coming months.
Experts have warned that the number of households suffering fuel poverty, whereby heating bills account for more than a tenth of a family's income, will double to nine million by 2016.

Worry: Experts have warned that the number of households suffering fuel poverty could double by 2016
A shocking 23 per cent of families are already having to choosing between buying food or using heating, according to a survey by the Energy Bill Revolution campaign.
A fifth of respondents said that their children were ill more regularly as a result of colder homes.
The poll questioned 1,000 members of the Netmums website and found that 88 per cent of respondents are more concerned about fuel bills this year compared to last.
Sally Russell, the founder of Netmums, said: 'These are impossible choices for families to make.
'With almost nine in 10 families now rationing energy use due to spiralling prices, this signals a new winter of discontent for British families.'
Ed Matthew, the director of Energy Bill Revolution, said: 'No one should have to make the choice between feeding their family and heating their home.'
The campaign is urging the Government to use money from the carbon tax to insulate housing, which campaigners argue could reduce bills by £300.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 15:51

It's better that a little pain is felt now because the pain will be a whole lot worse if nothing is done and modern society collapses due to the Earth being too hot.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 17:09

Oh for crying out aloud!!!! Your starting to sound like some leaders that have graced the planet in the past spruiking a better world if we just get rid of the undesirables!!! Because there will be major ramifications for your mob if this is the case!!!! And using the what if precautionary principle as a guise to your plans!!!! What conspiracy theory????
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 19:07

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
It's better that a little pain is felt now because the pain will be a whole lot worse if nothing is done and modern society collapses due to the Earth being too hot.

CeeBee. If the current cycle(s) persist, it will be 40-50 odd years before we get any more global warming.


Created by Cuffy and Clow in 1997, based on Greenland ice core records, this chart shows temperatures for the past 15,000 years.


......or it may be worse than we thought.


Easterbrook - Projected Cooling


Who really knows... smirk

Posted by: Petros

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 20:20

CeeBee - all things aside, humans can exist if the global temperature increases. You need to educate your self on whether CO2 levels are a culbrit, or a response to the earths temperature variations caused by irregular heat input from the Sun.

After that, I suggest some rudimentary econonmics training.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 20:31

@ snafu - Ah yes, Easterbrook and the coming ‘Global Cooling...
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 20:47

Thanks for that CB.. Some excellent well thought out comments... Even you could learn something????
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 21:37

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
It's better that a little pain is felt now because the pain will be a whole lot worse if nothing is done and modern society collapses due to the Earth being too hot.


Ah yes - the Greens and various socialists creed... All the "PAIN" is usually worn by the poor, the outer suburbanites or the rural sector - never by the late sipping inner urban "progressives". As usual typical mindset that is always happy force someone else bear the burden of society (of taxation, of production, of aid/assistance etc.).
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 22:30

Your dead right Arnost... My point Exactly...
Posted by: S .O.

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 22:35

More than a few " Latte " sippers in Melbourne .

they voted in one of the few Green representatives in Parliment .
So 5 % of the vote controls the majority . Thats brilliant LOGIC ........
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 22:41

Oh sorry CB... We in the country basically live on about 45 to 80 grand a year... My towns average wage per year is 42 grand a year... Are you starting to understand the average, middle income families plight? If the Gov was fair dinkum about this global warming [censored], give families 20K to be spent on solar???
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 23:02

Thank you for that link back to 2008 CeeBee. Here is something else that came from the same year:

"In an opinion echoed by many scientists around the world, the Space and Science Research Center (SSRC), today declares that the world’s climate warming of the past decades has now come to an end. A new climate era has already started that is bringing predominantly colder global temperatures for many years into the future. In some years this new climate will create dangerously cold weather with significant ill-effects world wide. Global warming is over – a new cold climate has begun."

John L. Casey, Director of the Space and Science Research Center, 2008.

Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/03/2013 23:58


It is not understood by the Greens that the make electricity more expensive so that expensive renewable power is more competitive, is hurting poor people.

And every time the Greens stop a power plant from being built in the developing world, they are hurting the even poorer people in the third world more.

Its not right.
Posted by: Red Watch

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 00:06

It is a magazine article about a press conference. I cant really think of a better way to make sure something is science free.
I am as skeptical as the next guy about some claims for global warming, but come on. This article present no rationale, no data, and no analysis. It comes from some institute that advocates an ATM theory "discovered" by Casey in 2007. The institute consists of Casey, who gives no reason that he should be taken seriously, another guy in Bulgaria and a third in Tanzania, safey away from much scrutiny. I guess it is reasonble, given this august body, to just take their word for it. After all, they have a web site. What more could you possibly want?
Posted by: Cloudz

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 00:10

I own a 10 year old inner-city unit, in a block owned mostly by investors who are not concerned with power bills, it is virtually impossible to install solar power. Most of the people in these sorts of units are either singles or on lower incomes. We just don't have a choice.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 08:19

Be very happy to learn that they are being well looked after and compensated for the price on carbon.

Anthony Watt's took advantage of the generous feed in tariff when he installed his solar panels. His reason for doing so was to save money, though it will result in higher overall costs for electricity which will impact on the poor as there is no compensation for them in California as far as I am aware.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 08:52

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Be very happy to learn that they are being well looked after and compensated for the price on carbon.


Well that's a relief! And here I thought that the poor were struggling with electricity costs... Obviously with my tax dollars at work they are rolling in it: linky linky
Posted by: liberator

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 11:56

My tax cut, if you could call it that - was a few measly cents a week and I earn less than 80K a year. My wife does not work, she stays at home to run the house, so I don’t even have a second income. My last power bill was just short of $700 for summer.- Typically is used to average around $500 and my usage has not changed, if anything I've done all I can to reduce my usage. I turn off my lights when not being used. I've put in compact fluorescent globes.

The house is mostly in darkness at night except the light in the lounge room. I have two teenage kids who have their own PC's they need for school and such. They sit in their darkened rooms on their computers. I have a solar heated pool which I used to run the pump and chlorinator for 8 hours a day (recommendation by the pool people) - I cut that back to just 2 hours a day and my bill still hit the $700 mark.

I turn the pool down to 30 mins a day over winter just to maintain the pool and I have a pool cover! I have keep my family cool or warm, feed them, pay my mortgage, run my car to work every day, pay my insurances, pay my rates, my rego, fuel for the car, keep my family fed, clothed and schooled.

My daughter now 18 can't get any Centerlink assistance because I earn "too much money". I’d love to put solar on my roof and reduce my power bill but I simply cannot afford the cost I’d have to borrow money and I’m not going into debt for something like that.( I may look at getting something to run my pool pump and chlorinator if not too expensive – will save me some $ but not a lot) I get squat from the government cause I earn “to much money” and I don’t expect money from the government.

My next tax cut due in July? Will save me what $200 a year if I’m lucky 0- how does that compensate me when my insurance has gone up – extra costs they incur. My powder bill has gone up due to carbon tax, my gas bill has gone up due to carbon tax, my water bill has gone up due to infrastructure and carbon tax my food bills have gone up due to carbon tax.

What a joke the government is compensating us lowly low and middle class income earners. I’m not struggling, but I’m not on easy street either. but I know those on less than me certainly are and the carbon tax is not helping and the government assistance package does absolutely nothing. Cee Bee get out in the real world and talk to some people and just see how they are doing. The Labour Govt is on the nose big time and the carbon tax that we would never have is certainly causing a big stink.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 12:30

If the Government were serious about this scam, rather than give the CTax to developers to piss into the wind turning their great big fans.... Give $15,000 to every house hold to install solar!! Based on income of course... If you earn plenty and can afford to pay for it yourself you get nothing (CB falls in that category I presume).. Go along way in cutting CO2!! (cough bull cough cough)
Posted by: refstar

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 12:42

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Be very happy to learn that they are being well looked after and compensated for the price on carbon.

Anthony Watt's took advantage of the generous feed in tariff when he installed his solar panels. His reason for doing so was to save money, though it will result in higher overall costs for electricity which will impact on the poor as there is no compensation for them in California as far as I am aware.


Compensated? My so-called "cut" equates to a measley $2 per year. Yet my power bill went up ~$200 per quarter.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 12:50

My wife and I are on the pension not at all by choice but through circumstances not of my choosing and to my regret.
Nevertheless we have paid some millions of dollars in tax through my working lifetime of some 50 years as a farmer.

Our old age pension amounts to $570.37 per fortnight each or very close to$30,000 per year.
There is no other income ,other than a very occasional small helping hand from my kids when they themselves with families can afford it.
I regard ourselves as lucky compared to many others in this city as if you are paying rent of a hundred or couple of hundred dollars a week out of this pension sum there's not much left.

Even worse are those who are widowed and who live in their home of many years but only have the single income of some $16000 per year to pay the council rates of $1500 or so a year and as liberator points out, the constantly increasing water rates, rapidly increasing power bills, the telephone rents, the increasing insurance on their house, the increasing car registration and fuel costs that are their only means of mobility and etc and etc.
As the Meals on Wheels people in this town will tell you. you haven't seen real poverty until you see these lonely trapped people trying to exist on $570 a fortnight while Gillard and the utterly contemptible greens and the highly paid government supported latte sippers like we have seen on this forum advocate increasing taxes and prices on energy and all the flow on pricing effects that run through our entire economic system such as in increasing food prices, increasing transport costs, increasing electricity and gas costs, ,increasing water costs and etc all to supposedly force the decreased use of energy and give [quote] "a win win situation" in forcing people to use ever more expensive renewable energy.

The local Food Bank which hands out free donated food to families who can no longer afford afford to buy food for hopefully short term reasons has a distribution network that runs up to a 150 kms from Horsham and provides food, the very basic necessity of life to dozens of families and individuals each week. As well they provide counseling to try and help those unfortunates to extract themselves from their financial problems.
And all that only after a hard vetting process for eligibility and a time limit on how long they might access the Food Bank.

There are many more families and individuals that are in serious and increasingly difficult personal financial situations who don't qualify for the volunteer run Food Bank help.

But of course the well off well paid utterly self centred of this world demand that all those people be forced to pay even more for their energy which they already use as little as possible of, so as to force them to use even less energy and switch to grossly expensive highly unreliable renewable energy so as to "Save the Planet".
"Saving the Plant" from what is no longer evident as ever more science based evidence comes forward showing that the claimed Catastrophic global warming was nothing more than a chimera of unrealistic climate computer programming and overwrought imaginings of some self promoting and increasingly discredited climate warming scientists.

A "renewable energy" technology which an increasing number of studies is showing does nothing to actually reduce CO2 emmissions and in some cases when the backup coal and gas fired generators are truthfully included in the system analysis is shown to be responsible for increasing CO2 emmissions.

That is the reality of the cruel, deliberately untruthful and the uncaring and complete callousness of those who are the true believers in the global warming cult.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 12:59

No-one said that it will be pain free.

No free lunch with Tony Abbott either who will need to find $11,000,000,000 (billion) each year to fund his direct action plan and that money will be coming from the taxpayer. Or to put it another way it will cost every household $1300 every year.

link
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:01

Here, here. Well spoken ROM. My father now falls into one of those categories you describe above. Good Friday this year would have been 63 years together in the same house.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:04

Originally Posted By: refstar
Originally Posted By: CeeBee
Be very happy to learn that they are being well looked after and compensated for the price on carbon.

Anthony Watt's took advantage of the generous feed in tariff when he installed his solar panels. His reason for doing so was to save money, though it will result in higher overall costs for electricity which will impact on the poor as there is no compensation for them in California as far as I am aware.


Compensated? My so-called "cut" equates to a measley $2 per year. Yet my power bill went up ~$200 per quarter.


What percentage of that rise in price is due to the price on carbon?
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:05

OT and sentimental, this September (26th) would have been mum & dads 65th wedding anniversary. There was 5 years of courting and as mum always added, "2 years of perving before that".... evillaugh

cheers
Posted by: liberator

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:15

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/power-or-food-the-bill-shock-dilemma-20130325-2gp18.html
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:19

The true believers in the global warming cult seem to be so isolated in their fanatical ideology that they seemingly have no conception of the disgust, contempt and even hatred for their ideology that is slowly arising in all western societies as the full impact of their cruel ideology starts to bite in the living quality and living standards of the citizens of the countries where their policies they have so forcefully advocated have been implemented.

In time they and their ilk will become the pariahs of society, unwanted and viewed with complete contempt and disgust for what they are and what they have become.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:23

...
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:26

...
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:31


Renewable energy target survives review, despite criticism

Australia's renewable energy target will survive at its current size after the Gillard government rejected calls from some of the country's largest power companies and business lobbies to cut it back.

Responding to a review of the target on Thursday, Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said the government had decided to maintain the current target to ensure certainty for investors.

He said modelling by the Climate Change Authority – which carried out a review of the target and recommended its size remain untouched – also found that reducing the target would do little to ease power prices while at the same time pump out an extra 119 million tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said the government's renewable energy target would remain at the current level.

''It is a very important part of the overall climate change policies the government has put in place,'' Mr Combet said.

''The renewable energy target will work closely with the carbon price in driving a lot of investment in renewable energy and we want to ensure investors in renewable energy the government is very supportive of the investments they are making.''

The target requires 20 per cent of Australia's electricity supply to come from renewable energy sources by 2020. Under the scheme a target is set for large-scale renewable projects – such as wind farms – to produce 41,000 gigawatt hours by 2020.

Investment surge

The Clean Energy Council's Kane Thornton said the government's decision to leave the basic settings of its renewable energy target (RET) unchanged opens the way for a further $18 billion in investment for the sector.

''All major political parties – and all incumbent generators – agree to the principle of policy stability and for policies not to change half-way through the cycle,'' Mr Thornton, deputy chief executive at the council, said.

The RET program, in place since 2001, had already drawn $10 billion into large-scale renewable ventures, particularly wind, with another $8 billion invested in smaller-scale projects, primarily solar photovoltaic (PV) panels. That investment would double by 2020 if the existing settings remain unchanged, Mr Thornton said.

Mr Thornton disputed claims by Origin Energy and others that the cost of renewable energy will rise over the remainder of the scheme.

“The costs of the RET scheme have peaked and will reduce from here on in, as the costs of technologies come down,” he said.

link
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:34


What's very interesting about that article Lib, is the fact that Vic, along with SA have the highest total capacity for wind in Oz, yet Vic's electricity prices have increased by an average 33 per cent over the past five years!
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:47

I'm in the same boat as Rom but younger at 56 and with less money in the pension so my wife and I both work whatever hours we can get to make ends meet. My wife gets $11.00 a fortnight in a disability pension because she works a partime job. I don't qualify for a zac from centerlink because I am on a massive DFRDB Pension of $22,500.00 pre tax plus from 25 years military service and a small disability pension from DVA which adds another $4k to my gross income. My wife earns around $9K per annum before tax.

I have explained this all to CB before so I won't go into details again but a cost hike across the board for everything that you use (basically every facet of life) was hit by the carbon tax as everything needs energy to be produced. You still can't see it can you CB? $200.00 a year compo is nothing compared to the increased costs for EVERYTHING.

As for Tony Abbot having to find $11 billion to fund things what a joke. Before he gets to funding his plans what do we find? He has to find $300+ Billion (The treasurer won't release the real totals for some reason - I wonder what that could be?)to paying back the ongoing and daily climbing debt that Labor has saddled the entire country with so don't start throwing numbers around if you don't have any idea what is involved overall in the countries debt ridden present government.

The failure of the planned windfalls from the MRRT as well as the carbon trading scheme starting at $29.00 a tone but linked to the European scheme (which is currently under $7.00 a ton) has meant that the government has had to ask for another credit card to pay off the first one.

The present government is morally and financially bankrupt and doling out compo payments for miniscule amounts won't win the any votes seeing it was them that caused the price rises and the need for compensation in the first place.

Labor took office with a $14 billion dollar surplus created over 11 years by the Howard government from responsible spending after dragging Australia out of the debt the last time Labor held office. Labor have pizzed that up against the wall like a drunk salior in Kings Cross on a 5 day bender and for what gain? Labor social experiments gone wrong, again and again and again and the anihilation of a least one or quite possibly 2 (Labor and Greens) political parties at the next election.

A large portion of this was used to subsidise planned renewable projects which have failed utterly to produce anything that turns a profit.
Posted by: refstar

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 13:49

Originally Posted By: CeeBee
...


Woohoo for you - prob is (a) in the NT you can't put back into the grid and (b) with a 6 month long wet season in the North (on average), solar panels would be useless.....what then!?

Seems more of a 'NIMBY' type of attitude.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 14:18

And here is the close to end result of a major push into the so called Renewable Energies m for the country that started the Industrial Revolution some 350 years ago, an Industrial Revolution which has completely altered all of mankind's recent past and our far future for the better amongst the vast bulk of the earth's peoples.

An Industrial Revolution founded entirely on cheap, readily available, totally reliable British invented, designed and built coal powered energy.

And now at the behest of the global warming cultist lobby and it's corrupt climate warming advocates ably assisted by pure stupidity on behalf of an arrogant, ignorant and completely out of touch with the people, British political establishment who have turned their backs on coal and gas we see this sadly happening to a once great Nation that in it's prime created an Empire which ruled over 22% of the world's lands and 450 millions, one fifth of the then world's peoples, the greatest Empire in history and an Empire on which it was said that the "Sun never sets"

And it has all descended into a farce and a politically created social disaster the likes of which have rarely been seen in modern history

Via The Telegraph

It’s payback time for our insane energy policy

An obsession with CO2 has left us dangerously short of power as coal-powered stations are forced to close

As the snow of the coldest March since 1963 continues to fall, we learn that we have barely 48 hours’ worth of stored gas left to keep us warm, and that the head of our second-largest electricity company, SSE, has warned that our generating capacity has fallen so low that we can expect power cuts to begin at any time. It seems the perfect storm is upon us.

The grotesque mishandling of Britain’s energy policy by the politicians of all parties, as they chase their childish chimeras of CO2-induced global warming and windmills, has been arguably the greatest act of political irresponsibility in our history.

Three more events last week brought home again just what a mad bubble of make-believe these people are living in. Under the EU’s Large Combustion Plants Directive, we lost two more major coal-fired power stations, Didcot A and Cockenzie, capable of contributing no less than a tenth to our average electricity demands.
We saw a French state-owned company, EDF, being given planning permission to spend £14 billion on two new nuclear reactors in Somerset, but which it says it will only build, for completion in 10 years’ time, if it is guaranteed a subsidy that will double the price of its electricity.
Then, hidden in the small print of the Budget, were new figures for the fast-escalating tax the Government introduces next week on every ton of CO2 emitted by fossil-fuel-powered stations, which will soon be adding billions of pounds more to our electricity bills every year.
Within seven years this new tax will rise to £30 a ton, and by 2030 to £70 a ton, making it wholly uneconomical to generate any more electricity from the coal and gas-fired power stations that last week were still supplying two thirds of our electricity.

Put all this together and we see more starkly than ever the game the Government is playing. It knows that no company would build wind farms unless it is given subsidies that, in effect, nearly double or treble the price of its electricity.
The Government will only get CO2-free nuclear power if it promises it an equal subsidy.

And now the Coalition is also hell-bent on driving our much cheaper and more reliable coal and gas-fired plants out of business, by imposing a carbon tax that will not only eventually double the cost of their electricity, but also make it impossible for them to survive.
So mad is this policy of “double-up all round” that it is driving even the largest and most efficient power station in the country, Drax, capable of supplying seven per cent of all the power we use, to switch from burning coal to wood chips, imported 3,000 miles across the Atlantic from the US.
And how has the Government forced Drax to do this? By giving it a subsidy on wood chips that doubles the value of its electricity, while putting an increasingly prohibitive tax on coal.

This is all insane in so many ways that one scarcely knows where to begin, except to point out that, even if our rulers somehow managed to subsidise firms into spending £100 billion on all those wind farms they dream of, they will still need enough new gas-fired power stations to provide back-up for all the times when the wind isn’t blowing, at the very time when the carbon tax will soon make it uneconomical for anyone to build them.

So we are doomed to see Britain’s lights going out, all because the feather-headed lunatics in charge of our energy policy still believe that they’ve got to do something to save the planet from that CO2-induced global warming which this weekend has been covering much of the country up to a foot deep in snow.
Meanwhile, the Indians are planning to build 455 new coal-fired power stations which will add more CO2 to the atmosphere of the planet every week than Britain emits in a year.

Thank you, David Cameron, leader of “the greenest government ever”. Thank you, Ed Miliband, father of the Climate Change Act, the most expensive suicide note in history.
Between you, you seem determined to switch off our lights, lock the door and throw away the key. We owe you more than we can say.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 14:32

Excellent news that the UK is going to have a carbon tax from next week ROM - made my day. The U.S. and China will be next.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 14:37

Thats Ok CeeBee . People remember.
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 15:39

"Excellent news that the UK is going to have a carbon tax from next week" CB

Down the gurler goes UK, like Australia and others, they must be off their rocker! carbon prices are like Coles, "down, down"
And they are going through their 5th cold winter in a row!
And it will achieve nothing as it has done elsewhere!
cheers
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 15:44

...
Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 15:46

I see nothing on google about UK getting a carbon tax!
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 15:53

It's hidden in ROM's post from the Telegraph above BD.

Originally Posted By: ROM
Then, hidden in the small print of the Budget, were new figures for the fast-escalating tax the Government introduces next week on every ton of CO2 emitted by fossil-fuel-powered stations, which will soon be adding billions of pounds more to our electricity bills every year.

Within seven years this new tax will rise to £30 a ton, and by 2030 to £70 a ton, making it wholly uneconomical to generate any more electricity from the coal and gas-fired power stations that last week were still supplying two thirds of our electricity.


Posted by: bd bucketingdown

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 16:12

Must be huge news then snafu...no one even cares!(except CB, of course!)
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 16:16


No one cares because it's not a big deal really seeing as how our economy is doing just fine with a price on carbon and the little bit that prices did rise due to the price on carbon was hardly noticeable.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 16:55

In other news - what now seems to be a very regular event:

Bosch dumps solar business as losses mount

German engineering company Bosch said it is abandoning its solar energy business, because there is no way to make it economically viable...

Read more
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 16:55

Carbon Tax hasn't worked for Australia! Why would it for any other country? Oh that's right!! To pay for renewable energy... I keep forgetting...
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/03/2013 18:27

ROFL I hope they link it like our Labor gubermint did. Currently trading at less than $7.00 AUD a ton in Europe. The price is so low that a trading halt will be called as NO ONE IS BUYING or trading in the futures - even the carpet baggers can't make any money out of it.
Posted by: Seabreeze

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/03/2013 18:44

Thread re-opened after 24 hour closure.

Once again, a reminder to stop the personal attacks/remarks which only serve to cause trouble and degenerate the debate.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 27/03/2013 09:29

There's a great article over at JoNova about Ultra Super Critical Coal Fired Power gives a 15% CO2 Emissions Reduction written by Anton Lang (TonyfromOz).

It all comes down to steam.

Assume (for a moment) that we have to reduce the emissions of CO2 by something like 20% between now and 2020.

Previously I showed we could achieve a reduction of 13% in CO2 emissions from the electrical power generating sector just by converting from the current 70’s technology coal fired power to the newest technology USC (UltraSuperCritical) coal fired technology. That 13% I quoted at the time was theoretical, but in China over the last three years the emissions reduction of new USC plants is even better, around 15% to 17%. This is off-the-shelf technology that handles base-load, produces cheap electricity, and reduces emissions.


It's well worth a read.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 28/03/2013 09:33

Originally Posted By: refstar
Originally Posted By: CeeBee
...


Woohoo for you - prob is (a) in the NT you can't put back into the grid and (b) with a 6 month long wet season in the North (on average), solar panels would be useless.....what then!?

Seems more of a 'NIMBY' type of attitude.


So you are trying to tell me that Darwin has 6 months straight of cloudy weather with no fine days in there at all? that i find hard to believe

We get more rain here than you would in Darwin ( and we don't get 6 months of "cloudy days" either and we are still able to power our house over the wet with Solar no problems (and without using a generator) no problems at all!
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 06:51


Renewables can do 24-hour baseload anywhere, anytime

The University of NSW has exploded the myth that renewables can’t do 24-hour baseload.

THE FUTURE of civilisation and much biodiversity hangs to a large degree on whether we can replace fossil fuels — coal, oil and gas — with clean, safe and affordable energy within several decades. The good news is that renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency measures have advanced with extraordinary speed over the past decade.

Energy efficient buildings and appliances, solar hot water, on-shore wind, solar photovoltaic (PV) modules, concentrated solar thermal (CST) power with thermal storage and gas turbines burning a wide range of renewable liquid and gaseous fuels are commercially available on a large scale.

The costs of these technologies have declined substantially, especially those of solar PV. In 2012, despite the global financial crisis, global investment in these clean, safe and healthy technologies amounted to US $269 billion. Denmark, Scotland and Germany and several states/provinces around the world have official targets of around 100% renewable electricity and are implementing policies to achieve them.

The principal barrier is resistance from vested interests and their supporters in the big greenhouse gas polluting industries and from an unsafe, expensive, polluting, would-be competitor to a renewable energy future, nuclear power. These powerful interests are running a campaign of renewable energy denial that is almost as fierce as the long-running campaign of climate change denial. Both campaigns are particularly noisy in the Murdoch press.

So far the anti-renewables campaign, with its misinformation and gross exaggerations, has received little critical examination in the mainstream media.

The renewable energy deniers rehash, among others, the old myth that renewable energy is unreliable in supplying base-load demand.

Renewable energy is reliable

In a previous article for The Conversation, I reported on the initial results of computer simulations by a research team at the University of New South Wales that busted the myth that renewable energy cannot supply base-load demand. However at the time of the article, I was still under the misconception that some base-load renewable energy supply may be needed to be part of the renewable energy mix.

Since then, Ben Elliston, Iain MacGill and I have performed thousands of computer simulations of 100% renewable electricity in the National Electricity Market (NEM), using actual hourly data on electricity demand, wind and solar power for 2010.

Our latest research finds that generating systems comprising a mix of different commercially available renewable energy technologies, located on geographically dispersed sites, do not need base-load power stations to achieve the same reliability as fossil-fuelled systems.

The old myth was based on the incorrect assumption that base-load demand can only be supplied by base-load power stations; for example, coal in Australia and nuclear in France. However, the mix of renewable energy technologies in our computer model, which has no base-load power stations, easily supplies base-load demand.

Our optimal mix comprises wind 50-60%; solar PV 15-20%; concentrated solar thermal with 15 hours of thermal storage 15-20%; and the small remainder supplied by existing hydro and gas turbines burning renewable gases or liquids. (Contrary to some claims, concentrated solar with thermal storage does not behave as base-load in winter; however, that doesn’t matter.)

The real challenge is to supply peaks in demand on calm winter evenings following overcast days. That’s when the peak-load power stations, that is, hydro and gas turbines, make vital contributions by filling gaps in wind and solar generation.

Renewable electricity is affordable

Our latest peer-reviewed paper, currently in press in Energy Policy journal, compares the economics of two new alternative hypothetical generation systems for 2030: 100% renewable electricity versus an “efficient” fossil-fuelled system. Both systems have commercially available technologies and both satisfy the NEM reliability criterion. However, the renewable energy system has zero greenhouse gas emissions while the efficient fossil scenario has high emissions and water use and so would be unacceptable in environmental terms.

We used the technology costs projected to 2030 in the conservative 2012 study by the Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (In my personal view, future solar PV and wind costs are likely to be lower than the BREE projections, and future fossil fuel and nuclear costs are likely to be higher.) Then, we did thousands of hourly simulations of supply and demand over 2010, until we found the mix of renewable energy sources that gave the minimum annual cost.

Under transparent assumptions, we found that the total annualised cost (including capital, operation, maintenance and fuel where relevant) of the least-cost renewable energy system is $7-10 billion per year higher than that of the “efficient” fossil scenario.

For comparison, the subsidies to the production and use of all fossil fuels in Australia are at least $10 billion per year. So, if governments shifted the fossil subsidies to renewable electricity, we could easily pay for the latter’s additional costs.

Thus 100% renewable electricity would be affordable under sensible government policy, busting another myth. All we need are effective policies to drive the transition.

link
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 07:29

I am not against using renewable energy(despite my sceptisism of AGW), however that article doesn't cut it. Constant reliance on computer modeling is becoming more and more worrying. Renewables simply will not be doing the job in the next few decades and cmputer modelling is not going to change anythiing. It has to prove itself in reality. At the moment it simply cannot do that. Untill it becomes economically viable on it's own even the most vocal global warming countries will not implement it as the primary power source because regardless of how much these countries/economies shoout about the evils of fossil fuels they simply don't care enough to make real sacrifices to do anything about it.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 09:23

I would love to see all Greenies adopt computer modelled power supplies for their homes and businesses exclusively.
Meanwhile I will be in the house with the bright lights on, cooking and running an air conditioner while those using hand cranked torches struggling to find the reasons why the model has failed and there is no power.

Of course models work - they are written to work and do not take into account real world factor such as a ECL producing 48 hours of 120kph winds over a 500klm long stretch of the coast, or 7 days of rainfall where very little solar is being produced and as for using hydro where do you think the water comes from to produce the power?

That's right it is pumped back into the dams after it has passed through the turbines and which power supply is used for that? Oh that's right your dodgy wind turbines.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 10:59

CeeBee's make believe free energy for nothing "fairies at the bottom of the garden" belief
Quote:
Renewables can do 24-hour baseload anywhere, anytime


And now, the very harsh reality from a highly industrialised nation that has gone all out to make a reality out of that same make believe, renewable ," fairies at the bottom of garden", free energy for nothing, ideology.

Yet despite the expenditure of as much as couple of hundred billion euros [ and a further anticipated $770 billion ; below ; edit; makes the $50 billion NBN boondoggle look like a bit of economic fairy floss ] so far on the so called renewable energy systems the Germans still only produce no more than 22% 0f their power needs from the so called renewable energy.

So much for supplying base load power to an industrialised nation. To claim otherwise is just blowing smoke out the nether regions.

In Germany, in the renewable energy field, the building of new wind and solar farms is coming to a halt despite the already huge subsidies paid by by both consumers and government, due to a claim by the renewable energy scammers that there is not enough subsidy support for renewable energy with demands for even more subsidies which, as Germany, like governments everywhere, runs out of money, will no longer countenance.

In fact as can be read below the German government like governments everywhere in Europe are suggesting that the over generous renewable subsidy regime in place at present will be cut right back in the near future.

And so there is now a full scale renewable energy investor retreat bringing private investment into German renewable energy to a halt.

As well there are rapidly increasing problems with the ability of grid owners to build the huge and complex basic electrical infrastructure that collects the energy from the widely scattered wind and solar farms provide particularly in the very difficult and horrendously expensive grid installations for the off shore wind turbines.

The German public are now fast losing patience and confidence and are becoming quite horrified with the cost and the social penalties particularly for the poor created by the increasingly unaffordable energy from the renewables

They are rapidly losing confidence and patience in the promises of a renewable powered Germany .

Now German industry is starting to desert and leave Germany due to the very high costs and increasingly unreliable power supplies and heading for places like the USA with its now very cheap shale gas and shale oil powered, very reliable and stable energy supplies.

From Bloomberg;

Merkel’s No-Nuke Stumble May Erode Re-Election Support

April 10 (Bloomberg)
Quote:
Chancellor Angela Merkel’s sweeping plan to transform Germany into a green-energy giant almost destroyed Nordseewerke GmbH, one of the country’s leading makers of wind-turbine foundations.

Nordseewerke, which produces Statue of Liberty-sized foundations, ramped up its manufacturing capacity and head count in 2011 after Merkel declared that Germany would begin a massive project to install 25,000 megawatts of offshore wind power by 2030.
More than two years later, the chancellor’s wind farms have been slow to appear, stymied by the difficulty of planting towers in deep ocean waters, an outmoded electrical grid and investors who are losing faith in the project.
The delays hammered 110-year-old Emden-based Nordseewerke, which filed for bankruptcy before DSD Steel Group GmbH bought it in February, retaining only a third of its 750 employees, Bloomberg Markets will report in its May issue.

“Three to four new offshore wind farms should be up and running in the German North Sea by now, but there’s not a single one,” says Tomas Marutz, Nordseewerke’s managing director. “German politicians want offshore wind power, but they failed to provide investors the progress and security they need.”

Merkel, a physicist by training, is attempting to lead the biggest transition to renewable energy of any developed country in history. In 2010, she announced that Europe’s largest economy would more than triple its share of renewable power by 2050 to 80 percent of the nation’s total consumption. The sea-based wind farms alone could cover an area six times the size of New York City.


Fukushima Disaster
Quote:
Half a year later, the nuclear disaster in Fukushima, Japan, spurred another bold move from the German leader. She decided to hasten by about a decade, to 2022, the shuttering of the country’s 17 nuclear reactors, which at the time produced about a fifth of Germany’s electricity.
The chancellor’s Energiewende, or energy switch, is one of her biggest gambles in eight years in office. As Merkel, 58, runs for a third term in September, political opponents and industry groups are attacking her for bungling the transformation, which helped push up household electricity costs 21 percent from 2008 to 2012.
In December, at a summit for her Christian Democratic Union in Hanover, she said that the 550 billion euro ($717 billion) effort is the most ambitious, complex and difficult project in Germany’s future.


Merkel’s Subsidies
Quote:
“If Germany succeeds, it could be a role model for economies all over the world,” says Claudia Kemfert, who heads the energy unit at the DIW economic institute, a research group, in Berlin. “If it fails, it will be a disaster for Germany’s politicians, society and economy.”
Merkel’s subsidies to renewable-energy producers are fueling runaway electricity costs and posing a threat to the stagnant German economy.
Consumers pay for the subsidies through a surcharge on their bills. The fee had surged 47 percent on Jan. 1 from a year earlier. In three years, it had more than doubled.

The Bundesbank, Germany’s central bank, said in December that it expects the economy to expand by as little as 0.4 percent in 2013 as the three-year sovereign-debt crisis continues to exact a toll on exports.
German industry has been hit hard by power prices, which in 2012 were about 40 percent higher than in France and the Netherlands, according to a February report by the Cologne-based IW economic institute, a research organization.


Economic Drag

Quote:
Saddled with these costs, some companies are holding back on making investments in Germany. Worlee-Chemie GmbH, a family- owned business that has produced resins in Hamburg for almost a century, will pay about 465,000 euros this year to finance the country’s renewable-energy expansion, the equivalent of 10 full- time salaries.
So Worlee-Chemie is expanding into Turkey, where in March it was preparing to start producing a new type of hardening agent.
“Higher power prices eventually weigh on the entire German economy,” says Michael Huether, director of the IW institute.

Merkel’s main opponent in the election, Peer Steinbrueck of the Social Democratic Party, is capitalizing on discontent with the energy switch.
In December, he said at an SPD summit that Germans now live in fear of power outages because of government missteps.
One month later, the SPD beat Merkel’s CDU in a vote in Lower Saxony -- the third straight regional defeat for the incumbent party and a sign that its lead in the national election may be eroding.
“Merkel is showing poor leadership on energy policy, and that could hurt her in the September elections,” says Carsten Nickel, a London-based analyst at Eurasia Group, a political- risk research and consulting firm.


Closing Reactors
Quote:
Merkel shocked Europe when she announced her plan to speed up the closure of Germany’s reactors. It was an about-face for the German leader, who has often moved cautiously, such as in her refusal to rush bailouts for Greece without guarantees of budget austerity.
The prior government of Gerhard Schroeder first decided to decommission the reactors, setting the 2020s as a target.
Merkel in September 2010 said she would extend their operation into the 2030s, citing their economic viability and safety record. Then the meltdown of three reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant in March 2011 helped the anti-nuclear Green Party that same month win control of the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg, which the CDU had ruled for 58 years.
Three months later, Merkel and her cabinet decided to permanently switch off the country’s eight oldest reactors and moved up the closing date of the remaining nine plants.


22% Renewable
Quote:
“We all want to get out of nuclear power and switch to a renewable-energy supply as quickly as possible,” Merkel told reporters in Berlin a month after the Fukushima tragedy began unfolding.
Germany was one of the first countries to kick-start its wind and solar industry with uncapped incentives starting in 2000. Today, it’s the world leader in solar power, with 1.3 million panels installed at homes and businesses.

More than 23,000 turbines turn across the country, mainly in the windy north, making it the third-biggest producer of wind power, behind China and the U.S.
By generating about 22 percent of its power from renewables, almost double the U.S. share, Germany saves more than 5 billion euros a year on energy imports. Its companies benefit too: Engineering giant Siemens AG (SIE), which makes wind turbines, and SMA Solar Technology AG (S92) have boosted sales because of the energy switch.
“Almost a quarter of our power comes from renewables, and we’re still one of the most successful and competitive economies worldwide,” Environment Minister Peter Altmaier says.


Great Pyramids
Quote:
Merkel’s expansion plan requires companies to add about 5,000 sea-based turbines by 2030 -- an effort that’s been dogged by technical stumbles.
To build the wind farms, ships carry steel foundations for turbines from the port of Bremerhaven to about 125 kilometers (78 miles) offshore, where cranes lower the 550-ton structures onto the seabed. They will support windmill towers taller than the Great Pyramids of Giza as part of a giant renewable-power plant in the middle of the North Sea.

Completion of the North Sea wind farm and at least four others has been delayed as crews grapple with the demands of installing equipment in seawater as deep as 40 meters (130 feet).
And grid operator TenneT TSO GmbH has warned it wouldn’t be able to connect several wind farms under construction to the mainland network on time, citing problems with transformer stations.
These setbacks have caused the nation’s second-biggest utility, RWE AG (RWE), and Denmark’s Dong Energy A/S to delay investments in new offshore wind farms in Germany.


Energy Jobs
Quote:
“The German energy transformation is as challenging as the first moon landing,” RWE CEO Peter Terium says.
These snafus are threatening jobs in cities such as Bremerhaven. In this former shipbuilding hub, unemployment dropped from 26 percent in 2005 to 14 percent in 2012, thanks to investments from alternative-energy firms.

Areva SA (AREVA), a French company that makes atomic reactors as well as renewable-energy technology, assembles 5-megawatt offshore wind turbines in Bremerhaven.
“The energy switch is so important to us because the offshore industry replaces the jobs lost in shipmaking,” says Melf Grantz, the mayor of Bremerhaven.
The wind industry employs some 3,000 in Grantz’s city, about a third of them at WeserWind GmbH. This maker of windmill foundations needs new orders by midyear or it may have to cut personnel, Dirk Kassen, its managing director, says. Repower Systems SE (RPW), a Hamburg-based wind-turbine maker owned by India’s Suzlon Energy Ltd., will this year let go most of the 400 temporary workers at its PowerBlades GmbH unit in Bremerhaven, says Rebecca Lange, a company spokeswoman.


Grid Update
Quote:
Merkel is also struggling with hang-ups on another massive piece of her energy switch -- updating Germany’s grid.
Today, the country depends on lines in the neighboring Czech Republic, France and Poland to reroute power from its wind farms in the north to the south, a manufacturing hot spot, where automaker Bayerische Motoren Werke AG (BMW) runs factories.

The Czech government last year complained it was close to a blackout because the German wind farms overloaded its grid.
On a December morning in a makeshift tent in the northern city of Schwerin, Merkel conducted a ceremonial opening of a long-stalled power line that had taken about a decade to plan and build. She pushed a plug the size of a soccer ball into a socket, and the line began dispatching electricity across the country.


Power Autobahns
Quote:
It’s part of an effort to construct three north-south so- called power autobahns to ship electricity. Within a decade, Germany aims to build or upgrade some 5,700 kilometers of power lines, the distance from London to Kabul.
As of August, 15 of 24 grid projects identified as key by the government were behind schedule, mainly because of public opposition to construction projects in neighborhoods.

If reactors close before the grid improvements are completed and no new fossil-fuel stations are added, Germany could suffer blackouts, Bavarian Economy Minister Martin Zeil said in February.
“We’re not yet where we want to be,” Merkel told business leaders in February in Mainz.

Eager to prevent a voter backlash in September, Merkel has pledged to contain power prices. The government has increased cuts to clean-energy subsidies during the past three years, and Altmaier in January proposed freezing the related surcharge to consumers in 2014 at the current level.
He said any increase thereafter should be limited to 2.5 percent a year.
If the government can control prices, Merkel said, other countries will follow Germany into renewable energy, giving the economy a chance to create a new export industry.


Germany’s Reputation
Quote:
“It’s not just Merkel’s reputation that’s at stake here,” Eurasia Group’s Nickel says. “Germany wants to be a leader in exporting these green technologies around the world.
But if the project doesn’t work at home, then no one will copy it.”


Meanwhile, Marutz of Nordseewerke is losing patience with government officials who say the wind farm mess will be fixed.

“We’re still being told that installations will pick up,” he says, “but the question is when.
Posted by: Vlasta

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 11:15

I have read what ROM just posted somewhere else , all of it . In my quest to find out what is the safe and critical overload and overdraw . To no avail . Only in India years back grid was aprox 20% overdrawn when it failed . Their grid is nowhere as good as Germany's . Germany plan to upgrade their own at a cost of 32 bill euros . There must be something we dont know about grid , otherwise they seem insane to me .
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 15:40

Originally Posted By: SBT
I would love to see all Greenies adopt computer modelled power supplies for their homes and businesses exclusively.
Meanwhile I will be in the house with the bright lights on, cooking and running an air conditioner while those using hand cranked torches struggling to find the reasons why the model has failed and there is no power.

Of course models work - they are written to work and do not take into account real world factor such as a ECL producing 48 hours of 120kph winds over a 500klm long stretch of the coast, or 7 days of rainfall where very little solar is being produced and as for using hydro where do you think the water comes from to produce the power?

That's right it is pumped back into the dams after it has passed through the turbines and which power supply is used for that? Oh that's right your dodgy wind turbines.


Again you miss the point, don't knock what you have not tried!
Basically if your house is built to suit the climate you do not need airconditioners, brick and tiled roofed houses in the tropics? who's idea whas that? someone from down south obviously! you have a solid brick wall with no shading in the sun all day and it will radiate heat back into the house all night, why do you think the original Qlanders were highset with verandah’s all round? because the were built to suit the climate.

As for bright lights on in the house well yes we have those, in the the form of super bright led lights that only use 5 watts of power....
In the last 12 month we have used the Genny once to charge the batteries, and if we lived in Townsville where it never rains you probably would never nee to charge batteries with a genny.
With only slight modification of lifestyle you could live grid free and still have the power.f
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 15:53

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
Originally Posted By: SBT
I would love to see all Greenies adopt computer modelled power supplies for their homes and businesses exclusively.
Meanwhile I will be in the house with the bright lights on, cooking and running an air conditioner while those using hand cranked torches struggling to find the reasons why the model has failed and there is no power.

Of course models work - they are written to work and do not take into account real world factor such as a ECL producing 48 hours of 120kph winds over a 500klm long stretch of the coast, or 7 days of rainfall where very little solar is being produced and as for using hydro where do you think the water comes from to produce the power?

That's right it is pumped back into the dams after it has passed through the turbines and which power supply is used for that? Oh that's right your dodgy wind turbines.


Again you miss the point, don't knock what you have not tried!
Basically if your house is built to suit the climate you do not need airconditioners, brick and tiled roofed houses in the tropics? who's idea whas that? someone from down south obviously! you have a solid brick wall with no shading in the sun all day and it will radiate heat back into the house all night, why do you think the original Qlanders were highset with verandah’s all round? because the were built to suit the climate.

As for bright lights on in the house well yes we have those, in the the form of super bright led lights that only use 5 watts of power....
In the last 12 month we have used the Genny once to charge the batteries, and if we lived in Townsville where it never rains you probably would never nee to charge batteries with a genny.
With only slight modification of lifestyle you could live grid free and still have the power.f


Not taking sides here YS as I reckon the trying to get off the grid is not a bad idea but in reality you are not 'off the grid' even when yoou are. Every one of those products you have applied too your house has used a large amount of foossil fuel to produce. If yoou truly want to get off the grid then this has to be taken intoo account as well. You have to remove yoourself from society or your attempts while noble in theory are all but useless.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 15:53

How much did you pay for your deep cell batteries and what is they're life span?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 16:31

Originally Posted By: Brett Guy


Not taking sides here YS as I reckon the trying to get off the grid is not a bad idea but in reality you are not 'off the grid' even when yoou are. Every one of those products you have applied too your house has used a large amount of foossil fuel to produce. If yoou truly want to get off the grid then this has to be taken intoo account as well. You have to remove yoourself from society or your attempts while noble in theory are all but useless.



True, but the embodied energy that goes into making solar panels is paid off within 18 months of usage, after that they are producing zero emissions for the next 30+ years, we have some old ex-Telstra solar panels that were manufactured back in 1982 and they are still going strong.
Other items can also be purchased second hand rather than buying new, therefore you are not actually buying something that has to be made, you are buying something that has already been made for years (and more reliable)

Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
How much did you pay for your deep cell batteries and what is they're life span?


we paid $2500 for them and they have a lifespan of between 8-10 years depending on use, but if you don’t cycle them as deeply you can get upto 15 years from them.
There are also other types of batteries on the market that have a lifespan of 20+ years.

You do the math.....$800 on electricity per 1/4= $2400 per year, over 10 years=$24,500 (and that’s at todays price, so in 10 years that price could be over $30k)
So that is an extra $22k that i wont have to fork out over the next 10 years.
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 16:41

What about your food YS. The power required to run the server you are using to log onto this forum etc etc. Everything yoou do in the moodern society uses Fossil fuels. As I said before I respect what you are trying to do but you are not 'off the grid'. Unless you give up every modern luxury you will always be a burden on the environment.
PS. From your own ecomomic point of view bloody good idea.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 17:14

Originally Posted By: Brett Guy
What about your food YS. The power required to run the server you are using to log onto this forum etc etc. Everything yoou do in the moodern society uses Fossil fuels. As I said before I respect what you are trying to do but you are not 'off the grid'. Unless you give up every modern luxury you will always be a burden on the environment.
PS. From your own ecomomic point of view bloody good idea.


My supermarket...(some..)




Again not always completely correct, if you are buying second hand goods that item now would mostly end up in landfill somewhere, but by me buying this item i am giving it a second life and therefore not needing to purchase a brand new item, therefore not using any fossil fuels to create a new item.
Why buy something bran new when you can get it much cheaper second hand?
We bought 8 window from the tip for $2.00 each (otherwise they would have gotten buried) they are all in good nick and even survived yasi without a scratch....
or what would be the other option? buy new? cut MORE trees down for the wood, then the manufacture process,glass, putty and all the rest of it it is a good idea for all as far as i am concerned.
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 17:18

Nice!!! But I can't grow that here!! I need global warming... Bring it on!!!!
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 17:36

I see mowen grass. Poly pipe. Good on yu for putting all the effort you can but you are still 'on the grid'. I'm not saying there is a problem with that but we are all a burden on the planet. As I said what about the power required to run the internet? That includes all the resources used to get humanity to the point it could develop the net in the first place. You lifestyle could only ever have been produced by humans being a burden upoon the planet. No ifs, No buts.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 19:34

So, if it is a burden then why add to that burden further with more Techno junk, and useless items that will be in the bin before 12 months are up?
Basically everything made today is manufactured to a price not a standard, it is all designed to be thrown away,(what a waste ) just look at all the rubbish they are selling in places like k-Mart now, it is nothing but a oversized $2.00 shop full of crap that wont last...
but hey it's cheap so we will just chuck it out and buy another one! problem is if you keep buying cheap junk you will end up paying much more than if you bought something decent to start with.
Or better still buy something that is made to last (2nd hand)
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/04/2013 19:50

Macarthur wind farm is important renewable energy

Canberra 12 April 2013. The Gillard Government today welcomed the opening of the Macarthur wind farm as an important milestone for renewable energy in Australia.


The Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation, Greg Combet, and the Minister for Resources and Energy, Gary Gray, congratulated AGL Energy, its joint venture partner Meridian Energy and all the contractors and sub-contractors who have seen the Macarthur wind farm project through to fruition.


The wind industry is playing a vital part in reducing Australia’s carbon pollution and will continue to grow strongly with the support of the carbon price and Renewable Energy Target.


The $1 billion project, the largest in the Southern Hemisphere, demonstrates the value of clean energy investment not only to the environment, but also to the local community and regional Australia.


Our highly competitive energy market, with world class wind energy forecasting, has successfully integrated wind generation into our energy mix.


When Labor came to power there was around 1,140 MW of wind farm capacity across the country. Now wind farms with capacity totalling around 3,000 MW are registered under the Renewable Energy Target, and many more projects are being developed.




Wind farms with asset lives of 25 years or more need stability in climate change policy to justify these investments.


The Coalition needs to make clear to the wind industry and regional Australia whether it supports the legislated 41,000 GWh Large-scale Renewable Energy Target which will ensure more than 20 per cent of Australia’s energy comes from renewable sources by 2020.


http://www.international.to/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=8067:macarthur-wind-farm-is-important-renewable-energy&catid=260:technology&Itemid=365
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/04/2013 14:08

Renewable electricity is reliable

In a previous article for The Conversation I reported on the initial results of computer simulations by a research team at the University of New South Wales that busted the myth that renewable energy cannot supply base-load demand. However at the time of the article I was still under the misconception that some base-load renewable energy supply may be needed to be part of the renewable energy mix.

Since then Ben Elliston, Iain MacGill and I have performed thousands of computer simulations of 100% renewable electricity in the National Electricity Market (NEM), using actual hourly data on electricity demand, wind and solar power for 2010. Our latest research, available here and reported here, finds that generating systems comprising a mix of different commercially available renewable energy technologies, located on geographically dispersed sites, do not need base-load power stations to achieve the same reliability as fossil-fuelled systems.

The old myth was based on the incorrect assumption that base-load demand can only be supplied by base-load power stations; for example, coal in Australia and nuclear in France. However, the mix of renewable energy technologies in our computer model, which has no base-load power stations, easily supplies base-load demand. Our optimal mix comprises wind 50-60%; solar PV 15-20%; concentrated solar thermal with 15 hours of thermal storage 15-20%; and the small remainder supplied by existing hydro and gas turbines burning renewable gases or liquids. (Contrary to some claims, concentrated solar with thermal storage does not behave as base-load in winter; however, that doesn’t matter.)

The real challenge is to supply peaks in demand on calm winter evenings following overcast days. That’s when the peak-load power stations, that is, hydro and gas turbines, make vital contributions by filling gaps in wind and solar generation.

Renewable electricity is affordable

Our latest peer-reviewed paper, currently in press in Energy Policy journal, compares the economics of two new alternative hypothetical generation systems for 2030: 100% renewable electricity versus an “efficient” fossil-fuelled system. Both systems have commercially available technologies and both satisfy the NEM reliability criterion. However, the renewable energy system has zero greenhouse gas emissions while the efficient fossil scenario has high emissions and water use and so would be unacceptable in environmental terms.

We used the technology costs projected to 2030 in the conservative 2012 study by the Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (In my personal view, future solar PV and wind costs are likely to be lower than the BREE projections, and future fossil fuel and nuclear costs are likely to be higher.) Then, we did thousands of hourly simulations of supply and demand over 2010, until we found the mix of renewable energy sources that gave the minimum annual cost.

Under transparent assumptions, we found that the total annualised cost (including capital, operation, maintenance and fuel where relevant) of the least-cost renewable energy system is $7-10 billion per year higher than that of the “efficient” fossil scenario. For comparison, the subsidies to the production and use of all fossil fuels in Australia are at least $10 billion per year. So, if governments shifted the fossil subsidies to renewable electricity, we could easily pay for the latter’s additional costs.

Thus 100% renewable electricity would be affordable under sensible government policy, busting another myth. All we need are effective policies to drive the transition.
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/baseload...will-work-92421
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/04/2013 16:32

There you go again, thinking the "capacity" equals actual output from wind turbines. The "Capacity" is what it is rated at the wind turbine not what actually makes it passed the first transformer. So a 100MW wind farm will only ever produce 50MW and only then if every turbine is running at 100% efficiency which is impossible for anything but the briefest possible moment in time.

In real figures wind turbines generate between 4 and 12% averaged out over 12 months so 12% of 100Mw is 8.3MW and that is a pathetically low figure from a 100MW Capacity wind farm. In real terms it means next to nothing but in cost terms it means a huge amount has been outlaid to produce stuff all. And all the while coal fired power stations sit idling to immediately ramp back up production to take up the slack when the wind stops thereby consuming even more energy than normal. Yes folks we are really on a winner with wind.

Quote:
On average wind farms in south-east Australia operate at a capacity factor of around 30-35%.
http://windfarmperformance.info/
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/04/2013 17:14

Yep, and the alternative's are so much better... whistle wink

Quote:
Current nuclear power plants must operate below the temperatures and pressures that coal-fired plants do, since the pressurized vessel is very large and contains the entire bundle of nuclear fuel rods. The size of the reactor limits the pressure that can be reached. This, in turn, limits their thermodynamic efficiency to 30–32%.

Generally speaking, nuclear plants were designed for a life of about 30 years




These 2 operate at between 31.9 and 35.4% Peak efficiency.


Originally Posted By: SBT
And all the while coal fired power stations sit idling to immediately ramp back up production to take up the slack

Quote:
Nuclear and coal power plants may take many hours, if not days, to achieve a steady state power output.
Because they require a long period of time to heat up to operating temperature
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/04/2013 18:03

You have been big on efficiency for some time Yasi, with lots of claims and figures showing how inefficient coal and etc is and how "efficient" wind is,

So could you provide the justification for your claims by explaining your version of what you think "efficiency" actually is when applied to your wind turbines and etc.

What do you mean by being "efficient" ?

What are the standarised baselines against which you are measuring or claiming efficiency for wind turbines?
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/04/2013 19:33

Real facts and figures for the U.K. National Grid service. (using the U.K., as all data is available below in near real-time)


U.K. installed capacity.

coal - 24,930MW (24.9GW) using 15 CF plants
CCGT - ???
nuclear - ~10 - 11GW using 17 reactors
wind - 8,445MW (8.45GW) using 397 operational wind farms and 4,414 wind turbines

(*note* The UK also relies heavily on CCGT but I'm unable to find the installed capacity atm)

At the time of this post, the UK's demand is 40.45GW.

coal - 15.73GW
nuclear - 7.60GW
CCGT - 10.73GW
wind - 4.00GW
hydro - 0.38GW

The UK also imports power from Ireland, France & the Dutch. Real-time data below (updated every 5 mins or so):

U.K. National Grid Status

Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/04/2013 09:01

Originally Posted By: ROM
You have been big on efficiency for some time Yasi, with lots of claims and figures showing how inefficient coal and etc is and how "efficient" wind is,

So could you provide the justification for your claims by explaining your version of what you think "efficiency" actually is when applied to your wind turbines and etc.

What do you mean by being "efficient" ?

What are the standarised baselines against which you are measuring or claiming efficiency for wind turbines?


As have you with your constant attacks on anything that remotely resembles a renewable energy source.

My point is even Coal and nuclear have their shortcomings,(Pollution aside) one of them being that they are not as efficient as you all thought that they must have been.

If you look at the chart below seems that 2 Alternative resources blow coal out of the water when it comes to efficiencies (yes it is not practical to dam every river), even Tidal sources come in at nearly 90% efficiency...

Look at the wind and nuclear efficiencies.....

Posted by: __PG__

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/04/2013 10:02

Further story about the Macarthur wind farm here
Quote:

The AU$1 billion Macarthur Wind Farm has opened in Victoria three months ahead of schedule, giving our green energy capabilities a massive leg up. Able to generate up to 420 Megawatts of electricity — enough to power 220,000 homes — wind turbine manufacturer Vestas said that the plant brings Australia's cumulative wind energy capacity to over 50 per cent.

The plant was constructed by Vestas and Leighton as part of Australia's Renewable Energy Target, which aims to see at least 20 per cent of Australia's energy supplied by renewable resources by 2020. Wind power is one of the cleanest sources of energy available.

It was also the first project to make use of the Vestas V112-3.0 MW wind turbine.

This has not stopped locals from protesting the wind farm, due to feeling ill effects such as insomnia, headaches and nausea caused by sub-audible infra-sound. However, professor Simon Chapman of the University of Sydney called these symptoms "a psychogenic phenomenon being whipped up in communities of people who are often envious of the good fortune of their neighbours who have 'drought proofed' the farm with annual turbine rental windfalls and who mysteriously never get the symptoms themselves".

The Musselroe, Tasmania, wind farm, which will add 168 Megawatts to Tasmania's power supply, is still on target to be completed and opened in July this year.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/04/2013 07:22


Solar Power Record In Germany — 22.68 GW

On Monday, the 15th of April, 2013, the approximate 1.3 million solar power systems in Germany set a new domestic/world record by reaching a peak power output of 22.68 GW at noon.

The New Normal

This new record is almost 0.5 GW above the “old” record of 22.2 GW, which was set on May 25th, 2012. Allthough I love celebrating all solar records, the biggest news might be that “just” 22.68 GW is apparently no longer newsworthy in Germany, because above 15-20 GW of solar have become a regularity.

During the first two weeks of April, solar surpassed the 20 GW mark on several occasions and made a meaningful contribution to the domestic power supply on every single day. For everybody remotely familiar with German or Central European weather conditions, it’s needless to say that it wasn’t all sunshine & cloudless skies in April.

Since solar panels last for 25+ years and have almost no marginal costs, I like to use the opportunity to mention the fact that whatever might happen in policy in the coming years, those yellow areas of the electricity market will remain liberated* from the external effects caused by conventional electricity production for at least one generation. (*To use a slightly more energy revolutionary sort of language)

So, lets celebrate the new solar world record of 22.68 GW of solar power on a national grid, despite its relative “mediocrity,” with a little infographic!

Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/04/2013 10:35



I'd take a coal mine before this.

Macarthur Wind Farm


Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/04/2013 10:52

Alternative Energies

The resolution to China's fuel quality problems demonstrates the nation's preference for environmental measures that can be combined with economic stimulus or alleviated through tax breaks. There is no other industry so likely to benefit from this strategy as alternative energy.

In fact, the pollution of the last few months has already given a boost to China's lagging solar panel manufacturers. By the end of January, China had already announced plans to increase its 2015 targets for solar installation by 67%. In 2012, China's solar companies were suffering from an oversupply of panels and the price of bonds issued by the companies had plummeted. Panel prices were down by 25%. With the increase in pollution, however, more investors are convinced that China's government will continue to keep these companies prosperous. Bond prices have already started to respond.

China's commitments to increasing clean energy overall have shifted from a 36-gigawatt increase of installed capacity in 2012 to a 52-gigawatt uptick planned for this year.

While the mandated increases in solar capacity are good for domestic industry, growth in other areas is poised to benefit Western companies. "U.S. companies and European companies are quite happy about China moving on standards," says Wagner. "It will be a tougher push for Chinese domestic companies."

In a report released by the Pew Charitable Trusts earlier this month, U.S. suppliers of renewable energy and power management products had a US$1.63 billion trade surplus with China in the year 2011, out of a total US$8.5 billion in clean energy goods and services that were exchanged.

In addition, China's increasing investment in alternative energy sources is occurring at the same time other nations are drawing back on similar initiatives. While China excels in manufacturing wind turbine blades and solar panels, Western companies lead in the high tech and specialty equipment required to run those energy sources and connect them successfully to an energy grid.

While China's increasing commitment to cleanup will boost certain clean energy and environmentally-friendly industries, some experts worry that these measures alone will not be enough to improve air quality. "We hope that there will also be stricter regulations, from approving new coal-fired power plants to information disclosure from factories and punishment to those factories that violate the emission controls,"Wei notes. "It will be very difficult for China to clean up its air."

http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/arabic/article.cfm?articleid=2948&language_id=1
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 15:28

Renewable Energy Capacity in Asia to Reach 535.2 GW by 2020

The total amount of renewable energy capacity installed in the Asia-Pacific region excluding hydropower is set to hit 535.2 gigawatts by the end of the decade according to the latest research from GlobalData.
According to GlobalData’s Renewable Energy Market in Asia-Pacific to 2020 report, these strong gains in renewable energy in the region will be driven by the rapid growth of the region’s late developing economies. China, expected to become the world’s largest economy on a purchasing power parity basis in under a decade, will lead capacity increases.
The Middle Kingdom is pushing hard to expand its usage of clean, renewable energy sources as the area’s dependence on coal-fired plants for electricity has already created severe air pollution problems in its major cities, while its net power demand is sure to increase as the area continues to experience economic growth.

By the end of China’s 12th Five Year Plan, covering the period from 2011 – 2015, China will hit 130 gigawatts in renewable energy capacity. China hopes that 15 per cent of the country’s electricity will be generated from renewable sources by the 2020, and in 2013 alone plans to add a total of 49 gigawatts in renewable energy capacity, of which 18 gigawatts will be derived from wind power and 10 gigawatts from solar power.
Other leading economies throughout the Asia-Pacific region will also make major contributions to growth in the usage of renewable energy, including Australia, India, Indonesia, Japan, the Philippines and Thailand.
GlobalData expects the cumulative renewable installed capacity for China, India, Japan, Australia, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines to rise at a compound annual growth rate of 12.2 per cent during the period from 2012 and 2020.
Throughout the region as a whole, the percentage of power generated by renewable energy sources is seen by GlobalData as rising from 12.1 per cent in 2011 to nearly 20 per cent in 2020.

http://designbuildsource.com.au/renewable-energy-capacity-in-asia-to-reach-535-2-gw-by-2020
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 15:31

India Aims To Double Renewables By 2017

by Energy Matters

India's Prime Minister has announced an intention to double the nation's renewable energy capacity from 25000 MW in 2012 to 55000 MW by 2017.

In a speech given at the 4th Clean Energy Ministerial, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh says approximately 1500 MW solar capacity has already been installed in the country, and an additional 10,000 MW will be in place by the end of the 12th Five Year Plan in 2017.

India's National Solar Mission aims to to establish the country as a global leader in solar energy; with goals of 20,000 MW of installed solar generation capacity by 2020, 100,000 MW by 2030 and 200,000 MW by 2050.

The Prime Minister said the cost of solar energy has nearly halved over the last two years and while it remains more expensive than fossil fuels, if the cost imposed by carbon emissions is taken into account, then solar energy is more cost effective.

"However, with costs expected to fall further in the years that lie ahead, it will soon be fully competitive at the margin."

Dr. Singh wants to encourage domestic production of the equipment needed for the nation's needs and also to supply other countries. He is eager to see global manufacturers setting up production facilities in India.

India is also giving wind energy some further attention.

"India’s wind potential in both onshore and offshore areas is being re-assessed to draw a long term plan for exploiting this source of energy," said the Prime Minister. It appears that our potential for harnessing wind power is much larger than was earlier anticipated, though the potential is concentrated in certain parts of our country."

The Prime Minister acknowledged these are early days in India's efforts in developing a workable strategy for renewable energy and much remains to be done.
http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3695
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 16:43

...
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 17:03

This is a bit of news on the Danish "Vesta Wind Systems" company, the biggest wind turbine manufacturers in the world.
The news looks quite straightforward and is typical of any large Corporation's self agrandising press releases.

Vestas Wind Systems Showing Signs of a Strong Recovery

Quote:
Nashua, NH -- For the past two years, Vestas Wind Systems has struggled. Last year the company announced it was cutting more than 3,000 jobs in order to try to stay solvent. An oversupply of wind turbines on the market forced turbine prices down over the past years. This plus uncertainty around the U.S. production tax credit, increased competition from Chinese companies and a tightening of the European renewable energy market have all added up to difficult times for the giant wind turbine manufacturer.

Recent announcements made by Vestas however, signal a turnaround. Today the company announced that it has secured “a firm and conditional order” from Canadian developers EDF EN Canada and Enbridge for 166 of its 1.8-MW turbines. The wind turbines will be installed in the 299-MW Blackspring Ridge Wind Project, which is a joint venture between the two Canadian developers. Vestas said this order is its largest Canadian order ever. The companies expect delivery on the turbines to begin in the second half of 2013.

Vestas is also standing by its product, offering a 20+ year service agreement with the order, what it says is “the longest in Vestas’ history in the U.S. and Canada.” Vestas’ U.S. factories in Colorado will be involved in manufacturing components for Blackspring Ridge, located in Alberta. Once commissioned, it will be the largest wind farm in Western Canada

In other news, Vestas announced that it is now shipping three new additions to its 3-MW turbine line: the V112-3.3 MW, the V117-3.3 MW and the V126-3.3 MW. The largest onshore wind farm in Denmark will be using the new machines. Once completed the Noerhede Hjortmose project, which will be located in the western part of Denmark, will be the largest onshore wind power plant in Denmark.

Analysts have noted that the new 3.3-MW turbines could also be of interest to developers looking to replace aging wind turbines with new technology that offers greater wind harvest.

According to Bloomberg, Vestas shares gained the most in two months based on these announcements. Vestas gained as much as 11 percent, the most since Feb. 7, with trading volume at 79 percent of its three-month average said Bloomberg, which also said that the stock was the best performer in Copenhagen’s benchmark index and traded up 8.2 percent at 45.40 kroner at 11:47 a.m. in the Danish capital


Now from the US, the accompanying comment to the article.

April 18, 2013
Vestas came into Colorado making big promises and obtaining tax concessions from the City of Pueblo.
After the initial noise and hiring what followed were layoffs and a plant slow down that almost resulted in a shut down.
There are no jobs available at the Pueblo plant now.
Local applicants are never good enough or qualified enough to get a position there. But foreign workers do seem to come and go.

And that is the story with most renewable energy jobs in the US. If an applicant passes the many required background, credit and drug tests they get rejected because of certification requirements.
It is a deliberate attempt by the renewable energy industry to exclude as many workers as possible while looking like viable business to government tax agencies and grant administrators.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 18:21

Well you have provided an interesting efficiency graph Yasi. I didn't see it initially as I have you under the "ignore" button.

So to the graph and you still haven't defined yet what you mean by efficient, just posted a graph without any explanation on what you believe being "efficient" actually relates to..
The inference to drawn from that is you don't really know what "efficiency" is or relates too.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/04/2013 18:55

Originally Posted By: ROM
Well you have provided an interesting efficiency graph Yasi. I didn't see it initially as I have you under the "ignore" button. .

So to the graph and you still haven't defined yet what you mean by efficient, just posted a graph without any explanation on what you believe being "efficient" actually relates to..
The inference to drawn from that is you don't really know what "efficiency" is or relates too.

So why should i choose to reply to you, whe you are simply ignoring me? whistle
I have explained the efficiencies to you before, but it seems you are ignoring that too.. whistle
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/04/2013 07:05


Potential for rooftop photovoltaics in Tokyo to replace nuclear capacity

In 2010, nuclear power accounted for 27% of electricity production in Japan. The March 2011 disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi power station resulted in the closure of all of Japan's nuclear power plants and it remains an open question as to how many will reopen.

Even before the loss of nuclear capacity, there were efforts in Japan to foster the use of renewable energy, including large scale solar power.

Nuclear power plants in Japan provided more than just base-load by storing energy in large scale pumped hydroelectric storage systems, which was then released to provide some peaking capacity. If this storage were instead coupled to current generation rooftop solar systems in Tokyo, the combined system could help to meet peak requirements while at the same time providing ~26.5% of the electricity Tokyo used to get from nuclear output, and do so 91% of the time.

Data from a study of rooftop space and a 34 yr data set of average daily irradiance in the Tokyo metropolitan area were used. Using pumped hydroelectric storage with 5.6 times this rooftop area could completely provide for TEPCO's nuclear capacity.

link
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/04/2013 09:14

So using solar to pump water to run hydro. Sounds like a good use for it but there are a couple of shortfalls. Bet that a couple of days of over cast weather will see city wide brown outs as well as snow making them non productive too. Hmm some peaking capacity, in other words it can't meet the actual needs on anything but paper. Yes 100% cAGW/Green Ecco Nuts pipe dream.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/04/2013 10:46

The wind turbine pumped hydro storage in the UK as a replacement for wind generated energy, lasts for a little more than 8 hours when the wind energy is non existent due to no or low wind or too high wind strengths during which the turbines have to be shut down.
Typically these long periods of low wind energy generation occur during the winter high pressure calm spells in the UK just when the power is really needed, Wind generation is consequently at a very low level sometimes for days at a time.

Pumped hydro storage is apparently so costly and the power generation benefits so short term in the UK that there is no long term planning to build much in the way of further pumped storage in the UK.
As well, sites suitable for pumped storage are either very small or are a very beneficial and natural asset against which the destruction of for power generation for only a few hours of very intermittent energy generation is of little benefit or value.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/04/2013 11:34





Consumption, climate change and wellbeing
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/04/2013 07:00




Stephen Colbert - Wind Farms kill you
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/04/2013 11:55

Solar Frontier Panels To Power 11.6 MW Solar Farm

Solar Frontier CIS solar panels will be powering an 11.6 MW solar power station at Kansai International Airport, Japan.

SF Solar Power, a joint investment company consisting of Solar Frontier and Development Bank of Japan Inc. (DBJ) has been formed for the project, which will see 72,000 Solar Frontier CIS modules installed beside the airport’s B runway and on a cargo warehouse.

The two installations will generate approximately 12,000,000 kWh of electricity combined annually, enough to supply the power needs of 4,100 households.

Installation work is expected to start in the middle of this year, with a goal of commencing operations in January 2014.

After the project is completed, Solar Frontier, DBJ and Kansai International Airport will also work with other stakeholders to promote renewable energy, using Kansai International Airport as a model for environmentally advanced airports.

Solar Frontier’s CIS (Copper, Indium, Selenium) technology provides the highest conversion efficiency in thin film modules and impressive performance under partial shading. Less complex production processes and fewer materials needed for manufacturing translates to an energy payback time of less than one year. Solar Frontier says their CIS modules require 60% less energy to produce than traditional crystalline silicon processes.

Solar Frontier's CIS technology uses no cadmium, is lead-free, and has no special recycling requirements.

The modules have a temperature coefficient of 0.31%/K - much lower than many crystalline solar panels; making the modules a particularly good performer in high temperature conditions.
Solar Frontier has gigawatt-scale production facilities in Miyazaki, Japan.

Solar Frontier's joint venture with DBJ was established in February to primarily invest in utility-scale solar projects throughout Japan, but also to support <2MW projects that often have trouble sourcing project finance. Solar Frontier is contributing 60% of the capital and DBJ the remaining 40%.
http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3709
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/04/2013 12:02

The smart money is on renewable energy

Fossil fuel cheerleaders take note: Renewable energy ain’t going nowhere — and it may prove to be the better bet in the long run.

By 2030, renewables will account for 70 percent of new power supply worldwide,
according to projections released Monday from Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Bloomberg analysts examined gas prices, carbon prices, the dwindling price of green energy technology, and overall energy demand (which, in the U.S. at least, is on a massive decline), and found solar and wind beating fossil fuels like coal and natural gas by 2030.

The chart below shows annual installations of new power sources, in gigawatts; over time, more and more of the new energy supply being built each year comes from renewable sources (like wind turbines and solar panels), by 2030 representing $630 billion worth of investment, while new fossil fuel sources (like coal- or gas-burning power plants) become increasingly rare.



Full Story
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/05/2013 13:22

How Divestment Happens: The Inside Story from the Uniting Church of NSW & ACT

Just over a week ago here in Australia, the Uniting Church of New South Wales and ACT made the bold pledge to divest it's investment funds from the fossil fuel industry, directing them into renewable energy instead. It made headlines, and is the start of a coming wave of divestment campaigning in Australia. Justin Whelan, Mission Development Manager at Paddington Uniting Church explains how they got the Church Synod to make the decision - and one that was made by consensus!

There is an etiquette in the church that we don't clap resolutions when they pass, but this time excitement got the better of too many people. A wave of applause broke out. Was it only in this moment that people realised the significance of what we had done? Or was this the bursting dam, a community waiting a long time for a little nudge to help them be the radical, prophetic people they want to be?

For those of us who brought the divestment proposal to the 400-member council meeting (known as a 'Synod meeting') of the Uniting Church in New South Wales and the ACT, there was relief to go with the excitement. We had been negotiating with key leaders over the first three days of the meeting, soothing concerns and making small amendments as needed. The ethical investment managers had legitimate operational concerns, and by working with them they were addressed.

Another key leader, whom we had pegged as an ally, told us he would oppose it in the strongest terms. A long conversation ensued about theories of social change and comparisons with other campaigns he is passionate about. At the time we thought we hadn't convinced him but when the public debate came, he too supported the resolution with a minor change: he wanted to add to the decision!

So now we have committed to investing in renewable energy instead of fossil fuels, and a communications strategy will be devised by 'head office' staff to encourage and support individual members taking their own action, such as moving their superannuation (pension) funds to ethical investors.

All this by consensus. Our church’s decision making process was a potential problem but in the end we need not have feared. This proposal followed a string of resolutions about the environment and climate change over the last two decades. The church has been an outspoken advocate for climate action for at least ten years. At the same meeting we heard from farming communities being ‘fractured’ by the coal seam gas industry, and passed a resolution calling for the protection of valuable land and water resources. The divestment proposal was both an effective way to dramatically ramp up that advocacy, as well as putting our money where our mouth is. In this context, “we refuse to profit from destroying the earth” was a pretty easy message to sell.

If anyone was in doubt about the significance of the Synod's decision, the media interest will have set them right pretty quickly. With nothing more than a media release, our resolution achieved national print and radio news coverage, a string of interviews and a social media storm (thanks 350.org for helping with that!). One journalist asked me whether I really thought this would have any impact - whether anyone would care what the church does with its money. I felt like saying "well, you called me, didn't you?"

There are still questions of implementation for the investment managers to consider, and we are starting to get some backlash from coal mining companies that give grants to church-run community services. In Australia, the resource sector is so significant to the economy that it was inevitable that even churches find themselves enmeshed in it. These are challenges we all face as communities living in the world as it is now. These are challenges we must all face head-on if we are to avoid catastrophic climate change.

The Uniting Church in NSW-ACT has had an ethical investment policy for about 30 years, making it something of a world leader in that regard. We already refuse to invest in the tobacco, armaments, uranium mining and gambling industries, as well as companies with poor records on human rights, working conditions, and so on.

Now fossil fuel companies have been added to that list. For some this link to other toxic industries was a cognitive breakthrough: we weren't saying they were 'bad' companies, we were saying their once vital business has become a threat to human and ecological life.

As Bill McKibben says, and we emphasised, "there is no flaw in their business plan. The flaw is their business plan."

linky

Also read this:

Church to divest from corporations engaged in the extraction of fossil fuels

The Uniting Church today put its money where its mouth is on climate change.

A day after calling on the New South Wales Government to act to protect farming land, water resources and conservation areas from mining, the church’s Synod of New South Wales and the ACT has determined as a matter of policy that it should divest from corporations engaged in the extraction of fossil fuels.

The Synod, meeting at Knox Grammar School, Sydney, also required all Synod bodies whose investments are not managed by its Treasury and Investment Services to implement the policy.

The General Secretary of the Synod will write to other Uniting Church synods and its national Assembly advocating that they also join a divestment campaign.

At previous meetings the Synod had called for creation care to be integrated into all aspects of the church’s worship, witness and service, saying the threat of climate change was not being adequately addressed by state and federal governments or the international community.

It said that rapid expansion of fossil fuel mining (particularly coal and coal seam gas) in Australia was directly threatening agricultural land, human health and biodiversity.

Its Ethical Investment Principles call for divestment from companies whose activities “involve substantial change to the environment, which is not or proposed to be made good at the conclusion of the activity”.

linky



Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/05/2013 16:24

Quote:
By 2030, renewables will account for 70 percent of new power supply worldwide, according to projections released Monday from Bloomberg New Energy Finance


The report is linked below for any one to read... And it says nothing of the sort.

And I'd put money on the fact that that will not happen.

Only 15 years to provide 70% of energy from renewables that currently on comprise some 5% of worldwide supply now, and where China, India, Europe is building dozens, (multiples of dozens!) of coal and gas power plants? And don't forget that as the CSG reserves (and the Keystone pipe) come on line, a lot of the older plants in the US will be converted to gas? And each will be planned to have an economic life of 50 years plus?

And the only reason that renewables have expanded was solely as a consequence of taxpayer subsidy - and the world has run out of money. From here only investments that are at least cost neutral will be the rule...


http://about.newenergyfinance.com/about/...e-2012-edition/

Quote:
Who’s Winning the Clean Energy Race? 2012 Edition was developed for public informational and educational purposes. It is an update of Pew’s reports tracking 2009, 2010, and 2011 clean energy investment in the developed and developing countries that make up the Group of 20.

Highlights
Public and private investment in solar, wind, and other
technologies retreated from an adjusted 2011 record of
$302 billion to $269 billion, an 11 percent drop.

2012 investment in the G-20
declined amid the withdrawal or expiration
of key financial incentives and persistent
policy uncertainty

The Asia and Oceania region
has experienced uninterrupted growth in
investment annually for nine years and in
2012 became the leading regional destination
for investment for the first time. Clean
energy investment in the region grew by 16
percent, to $101 billion, accounting for 42
percent of the global total. In fact, this was
the only region to experience investment
growth in 2012, largely due to gains recorded
in China and Japan.

Investment fell most precipitously in the
Americas, where clean energy financing in
2012 was down 31 percent, to $50.3 billion.
The sharp decline came on the heels of more
than 30 percent growth in 2011, reinforcing a
pattern of investment volatility in the Americas.
Reduced financing in 2012 pushed investment
in the region to the lowest level since 2009.
The region’s largest markets—the United
States, Brazil, and Canada—fell by 37, 32, and
23 percent, respectively.

The region that encompasses Europe, the
Middle East, and Africa has traditionally
led all others in attracting clean energy
investment. In 2012, however, investment fell
22 percent, to $87.6 billion. This was the first
drop since reliable data have been collected.
Investment declined in the region overall
as various long-standing and substantial
markets—Germany, Italy, the United
Kingdom, and Spain—shrank in the face of
curtailed government incentives




http://bnef.com/WhitePapers/download/310

Pull the other one...
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 09:49

Wind power — even without the wind
Innovative storage system could enable offshore wind farms to deliver power whenever it’s needed.


Offshore wind could provide abundant electricity — but as with solar energy, this power supply can be intermittent and unpredictable. But a new approach from researchers at MIT could mitigate that problem, allowing the electricity generated by floating wind farms to be stored and then used, on demand, whenever it’s needed.

The key to this concept is the placement of huge concrete spheres on the seafloor under the wind turbines. These structures, weighing thousands of tons apiece, could serve both as anchors to moor the floating turbines and as a means of storing the energy they produce.

Whenever the wind turbines produce more power than is needed, that power would be diverted to drive a pump attached to the underwater structure, pumping seawater from a 30-meter-diameter hollow sphere. (For comparison, the tank’s diameter is about that of MIT’s Great Dome, or of the dome atop the U.S. Capitol.) Later, when power is needed, water would be allowed to flow back into the sphere through a turbine attached to a generator, and the resulting electricity sent back to shore.

One such 25-meter sphere in 400-meter-deep water could store up to 6 megawatt-hours of power, the MIT researchers have calculated; that means that 1,000 such spheres could supply as much power as a nuclear plant for several hours — enough to make them a reliable source of power. The 1,000 wind turbines that the spheres could anchor could, on average, replace a conventional on-shore coal or nuclear plant. What’s more, unlike nuclear or coal-fired plants, which take hours to ramp up, this energy source could be made available within minutes, and then taken offline just as quickly.

The system would be grid-connected, so the spheres could also be used to store energy from other sources, including solar arrays on shore, or from base-load power plants, which operate most efficiently at steady levels. This could potentially reduce reliance on peak-power plants, which typically operate less efficiently.

The concept is detailed in a paper published in IEEE Transactions and co-authored by Alexander Slocum, the Pappalardo Professor of Mechanical Engineering at MIT; Brian Hodder, a researcher at the MIT Energy Initiative; and three MIT alumni and a former high school student who worked on the project.

The weight of the concrete in the spheres’ 3-meter-thick walls would be sufficient to keep the structures on the seafloor even when empty, they say. The spheres could be cast on land and then towed out to sea on a specially built barge. (No existing vessel has the capacity to deploy such a large load.)

Preliminary estimates indicate that one such sphere could be built and deployed at a cost of about $12 million, Hodder says, with costs gradually coming down with experience. This could yield an estimated storage cost of about 6 cents per kilowatt-hour — a level considered viable by the utility industry. Hundreds of spheres could be deployed as part of a far-offshore installation of hundreds of floating wind turbines, the researchers say.

Such offshore floating wind turbines have been proposed by Paul Sclavounos, a professor of mechanical engineering and naval architecture at MIT, among others; this storage system would dovetail well with his concept, Hodder says.

In combination, floating turbines and undersea storage spheres could provide reliable, on-demand power, except during extended calm periods. Meanwhile, a siting many miles offshore would provide the benefit of stronger winds than most onshore sites, while also operating out of sight of the mainland. “It provides a lot of flexibility in siting,” Hodder says. The team calculated that the optimal depth for the spheres would be about 750 meters, though as costs are reduced over time they could become cost-effective in shallower water.

Jim Eyer, a senior analyst with energy consulting firm E & I Consulting of Oakland, Calif., who was not involved in this research, says the concept “addresses some important challenges associated with wind generation in general, especially the temporal mismatch between production and demand, and generation variability, especially rapid output variations that lead to excessive ‘ramping’ of dispatchable generation.” While he calls the idea “somewhat novel and potentially significant,” he adds, “Obviously we’ll need a proof-of-concept pilot to take the next development step.”

Slocum and some of his students built a 30-inch-diameter prototype in 2011, which functioned well through charging and discharging cycles, demonstrating the feasibility of the idea.

The team hopes to extend its testing to a 3-meter sphere, and then scale up to a 10-meter version to be tested in an undersea environment, if funding becomes available. MIT has filed for a patent on the system.

The researchers estimate that an offshore wind farm paired with such storage spheres would use an amount of concrete comparable to that used to build the Hoover Dam — but would also supply a comparable amount of power.

While cement production is a major source of carbon-dioxide emissions, the team calculated that the concrete for these spheres could be made, in part, using large quantities of fly ash from existing coal plants — material that would otherwise be a waste product — instead of cement. The researchers calculate that over the course of a decade of construction and deployment, the spheres could use much of the fly ash produced by U.S. coal plants, and create enough capacity to supply one-third of U.S. electricity needs.

Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 10:26

ROFL floating wind turbines tethered to 400 metre deep concrete balls.

Now colour me a cynic but what happens to your floating wind turbine in a 40kph wind and 2 to 3 meter high seas? Or say a 100kph wind gust and 5 metre high waves.

It will yaw in all directions and eventually the turbine blades will end up hitting the sea. A 1 meter movement at the base equals how much movement at the top of a 30 metre support pole? Just drop in at your nearest marina to see what I mean. Have a look at the yachts moored and see how far the masts sway in even the smallest of movements of the boat.

Suppose for a moment that this is somehow negated by thrusters or other passive aids then the torque produced on the turbine support structure would be huge, (Think about it. You have a centrifugal force at the top of a very tall support structure that is waving around like limp spaghetti anchored to the sea floor) now consider that every one of these has to be connected to a power grid in some manner, we now have multibillion dollar bath toys bobbing around in an ocean where the constant wind and wave action, combined with tides, will eventually see them crashing to the ocean floor. I haven't mention whale collisions for fear of upsetting the conservationists but then again a ship could play havoc with one or several of these if blown off course during a cyclone etc. Add into the mix salt water corrosion, maintenance issues, upgrades and replacements etc.

It might however be possible to use second hand oil drilling/pumping platforms to do this but again it is only a matter of time before it fails - not if it will fail, anything built by man and placed into the ocean will fail, the trick is making it last as long as possible and that will make them so expensive that they will never be built.

So to make these marvellous ocean bath toys it will cost billions (something the alternative energy people don't seem to care about is the costs) but for what return? A miniscule amount of unreliable power of unknown quantity supplied on an ad hoc basis. In other words the same problems of land based wind turbines but with infinitely more issues in construction, cost, development, implementation and practicality.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 10:32

Originally Posted By: SBT


Now colour me a cynic but what happens to your floating wind turbine in a 40kph wind and 2 to 3 meter high seas? Or say a 100kph wind gust and 5 metre high waves.


Get in contact with the research team at MIT, they will be working on proof of concept soon enough.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 10:35

Engineering considerations

Undersea mooring of floating wind turbines are accomplished with three principal mooring systems.[citation needed] Two common types of engineered design for anchoring floating structures include tension-leg and catenary loose mooring systems.[citation needed][33] Tension leg mooring systems have vertical tethers under tension providing large restoring moments in pitch and roll. Catenary mooring systems provide station keeping for an offshore structure yet provide little stiffness at low tensions."[34] A third form of mooring system is the ballasted catenary configuration, created by adding multiple-tonne weights hanging from the midsection of each anchor cable in order to provide additional cable tension and therefore increase stiffness of the above-water floating structure.[34]

The IEC 61400–3 design standard requires that a loads analysis is based on site-specific external conditions such as wind, wave and currents.[33] The IEC 61400–3-2 standard applies specifically to floating wind turbines.[35][36]


Economics

"Technically, the [theoretical] feasibility of deepwater [floating] wind turbines is not questioned as long-term survivability of floating structures has already been successfully demonstrated by the marine and offshore oil industries over many decades. However, the economics that allowed the deployment of thousands of offshore oil rigs have yet to be demonstrated for floating wind turbine platforms. For deepwater wind turbines, a floating structure will replace pile-driven monopoles or conventional concrete bases that are commonly used as foundations for shallow water and land-based turbines. The floating structure must provide enough buoyancy to support the weight of the turbine and to restrain pitch, roll and heave motions within acceptable limits.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 10:38

My point is that they haven't thought these issues out but it will soon become abundantly clear to them if they ever start scale model testing. The project will fail from lack of funding as they try to overcome some of the shortfalls I listed above. You just can't build what they want to build without spending vast sums of money for negligible returns.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 10:45

I find it funny that you think you know more than the people at MIT. They already know plenty about the challenges, but they have the people who can come up with solutions. The oil industry has already helped in that department oddly enough.


Read this and educate yourself.
http://web.mit.edu/windenergy/windweek/Presentations/P6%20-%20Sclavounos.pdf
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 11:08

I don't think I am smarter than anyone from MIT. I just have spent a fair amount of time fishing in the sea over 30 odd years and have worked on a couple of oil rigs in Bass Strait back in the 1990's and I have some understanding of what sea conditions can do to anything you put in the water.

Drag caused by marine growth on structures vastly multiplies the amount of force being exerted on that structure and is a reason a lot of oil companies have developed robotic cleaners to scour the legs of oil rigs in a constant process. Mooring lines, cables, chains, anchors whatever they use to tethering the floating component starts attracting growth and corrosion within minutes of it hitting the water. Anti fouling can only do so much before it degrades and has to be reapplied.

They may be brilliant engineers but maybe they haven't bought any marine engineers on board yet who can point out these issues.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 11:35

There are at least two very large off shore German wind farms that have not been connected to the German grid as the cost and complexity of laying the cables to the farms and connecting to the German grid is such that it might be another year or so before they become connected.
Meanwhile they are generating power or at least spinning and still getting paid by the government and German consumers for the power they supposedly produce but which nobody ever gets to see.

Perhaps it is not realised by most but it is the responsibility of the grid owners and operators, not the generators, to ensure that the grid system both connects to the generators and is of sufficient current carrying capacity to handle the maximum loads.
And that is where in ever country where this so called renewable energy has been promoted, the proliferation of widely scattered wind farms and solar has created some very serious grid problems as the grid was never designed to carry very heavy current loads from way out on it's more distant connectors where a lot of these farms are located.
And guess who eventually pays for all the grid upgrades needed, again!

Imagine trying to connect a very high voltage cable and all the interconnections required between turbines in an onshore wind farm let alone a farm of floating wind turbines in 300 metres of water to a grid with a whole network of interconnections and transformers that will be expected to last for 20 or 30 years.

And then a decent storm comes along which they, the scammers never counted on or cut costs somewhere that would have prevented any trouble, tips the whole turbine wind farm shebang over and destroys it and off it all floats in all sorts of directions as a real hazard to shipping.

Or most likely and not very far into the future, governments just close off all subsidies and consumer imposts for wind and solar and all the other renewable energy scams and tell the wind farm operators to just go and compete with everybody else.

So the operators just walk away and leave a huge ocean area covered with derelict floating turbines which break their moorings due to the lack of maintenance and go wandering off all over the ocean.

Moored ocean wind farm arrays are another wet dream of the renewable energy enthusiasts, excellent in theory, economically unachievable with our present level of technology and likely to be completely negated along with most other renewable energy technologies, both dreamed of and those like the present, still born in any case , when we hope to see as has been promised, the relatively close to achieving of controlled fusion power.
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 11:50

And to add;
The grid was never designed to carry a heavy current backwards from those wind farms or heavy at least when they do get a bit of wind, from way out near the end of the grid with it's wiring and transformers all designed to only carry current one way, from the power stations to the consumers.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 15:41

Originally Posted By: SBT


They may be brilliant engineers but maybe they haven't bought any marine engineers on board yet who can point out these issues.



You assume they wont ?

why so pessimistic ? do you want it to fail
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 16:44

No I don't want it to fail. As a proof of concept it should work in the scale modelling under artificial scenarios. But I know from past experiences that it will fail as sure as the sun rises for the reasons I detailed above as well as probably hundreds of others I haven't thought of.

I have never been against renewable energy production per se, I have always been against things that don't work.

Take wind and solar as perfect examples they are basically useless in large scale and the useless methods that have so far been tried again and again that have cost literally billions and are somehow still being tried like this idea of floating wind turbines in 400 metre deep water. Anyone with two brain cells will see it will fail. Nice experiment though and if the can prove the concept who knows in a 100 years or so it may become practical.

Bite the bullet, stop coal mining if you will, stop power generation from coal fired power stations if you have to but you need something reliable to take it's place and nuclear is the only realistic option. So go nuclear for the next 25 to 50 years, but continue to develop renewables in a research environment so they can take over from nuclear in the future or if they fail drop them and examine better ways of doing things but stop building huge wind farms because they don't work.

I think wind, solar, tides, waves and geothermal have a place but it is extremely limited for all sorts of basic physical and engineering reasons which we have explored time and again.

They are not and will never in the near future be able to take over from conventional power generation plants as has been shown time and again in their current forms. No amount of spin doctoring will ever make a wind turbine produce power equal to its stated capacity in its current form and Solar won't produce the same amount at night either.

We can already build, install and maintain 40 meter high wind turbines so stop building the damn things until we can get something else sorted out. We have the technology to produce power from them but not consistently so we need some way of harnessing and storing that unpredictable power that they do produce.

So what we need is a form of a huge UPS (Uninterruptable Power Supply) so it can store, regulate, smooth out the flow and hold extra power when it is generated so that is the area we need to be investigating. The only thing I can think of that could do this is hydro.

So build 20, 50 100, 200 dams all over Australia to store water so it can be used to produced power that way, (It also has the benefit of ensuring a decent water supply) in the interim it may be the only practical option. I don't give a rats that greenies will whinge about flooding valleys or flushing out species the only criteria I would use would be to maintain and allow for expansion of our farming lands. Anything else gets wet.

We could use the combined renewables power generated to pump water up into the dams so it could be reused to generate power (just as we are currently doing with the Snowy Scheme) not try to push it directly it into the power grid because it doesn't work.

The floating turbines will fail.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 18:01

Give them a call and tell them they're wasting their time then, you're an engineer right ?
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 20:55

No I'm no engineer (well that is not entirely true I do have a Dip IT in Network Engineering), I speak from world experience. In other words from what I have directly experienced. Try standing on the helipad (approx. 10 stories above the water) of Kingfisher A (oil rig in Bass Strait) when there is a 5 metre swell breaking against sea legs and see how much the entire rig moves even when it is secured to the sea floor and you want to hang a wind turbine in water 4 times deeper on a barge?

I can tell from your in depth, concise, well articulated and painstakingly crafted reply that you haven't got a bloody clue.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/05/2013 21:43

SBT - you're also forgetting the other marine killer... Salt and rust.

Between waves, biologics and rust - just about any structure if not maintained will be made non functional in a year or two. And marine maintenance is expensive - and this is a factor that IMHO will make any tidal / wave power generator uneconomic.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 11:58

Solar Cell Efficiency Breakthrough At UNSW

by Energy Matters

Those clever folks at the University of New South Wales have done it again - this time with a solar breakthrough that wasn't expected for another decade.

According to the The Sydney Morning Herald, researchers have used hydrogen atoms to address defects in silicon cells, meaning lower quality silicon can achieve the same performance as high quality materials - and even better according to Professor Stuart Wenham, head of the university's ARC Photovoltaics Centre of Excellence.

The Centre's mission is to advance silicon photovoltaic research and apply these advances to the related field of silicon photonics.

UNSW's technique should produce conversion efficiencies of between 21 per cent and 23 per cent and companies have lined up to partner in developing the technology. The key to the breakthrough was cracking the secret that made the use of hydrogen to counter defects unpredictable.

As a result of this development, perhaps recently forecasted price rises for solar panels may make a hasty retreat; depending on how long it takes to get this technology to market.

Professor Wenham has made a significant number of contributions to the PV industry during his three-decade career; including development of the buried contact solar cell and thin-film Crystalline Silicon On Glass technology.

In other UNSW solar news, Scientia Professor Martin Green has been elected into the prestigious Fellowship of the Royal Society. The Fellowship includes some of the world’s most brilliant scientists and engineers, including more than 80 Nobel Laureates.

Dr. Green is often referred to as the 'father of photovoltaics' for his pioneering work in the solar sector; which began in earnest in 1974 when he formed the Solar Photovoltaics Group at the University of New South Wales. Last year he was made a Member of the Order of Australia

http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3721
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 12:16

Good news if it actually means a reduction in price. Higher uptake is certainly possible.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 12:28

The price of solar at the moment has never been cheaper Brett, about 10 years ago a 80w solar panel would have set you back about $800 now you can pick up new 250w solar panels for $187.
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 12:45

And when I finally sell my place in Innisfail and rebuy it is definitely something I will consider.Be nice if you could get a good system for under 4 grand installed though.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 13:02

Just as an example http://www.solarlinkaustralia.com.au/solar-power-qld/2-0-kwp-system-qld
a 2KW Premium system installed for $3590 (or Budget system version $2990)
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 13:08

What sort of Electricity bill would that cover on Average? 200-300buck or higher?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 13:19

There are a few calculators out there where you can put in different values, if you want to have a play with some figures.

http://www.isolarcalculator.com.au/solar-calculator/
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 13:25

Cheers YS. That one says a 3kw would definitely cover my bill and then some.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/05/2013 14:16

You can adjust it down to a 2 and also adjust to suit your electricity consumption.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/05/2013 21:52

France launches 400 MW tender for large solar PV plants

The French Ministry of Energy, Ecology & Sustainable Development has announced the launch of a tender for 400 MW of solar photovoltaic (PV) plants 250 kW and larger.
The tender is part of a doubling of French PV targets to 1 GW of annual installations, and follows on two tenders for PV plants smaller than 250 kW. The tender will favor PV plants developed on sites with degraded sites including brownfields.

Bank guarantees not required
Plants incorporating both innovative ground-mounted technologies, including concentrating photovoltaics (CPV), as well as mature PV technologies on carports and roofs will be eligible. The requirement of bank guarantees before submission of tenders has been removed, to avoid disadvantaging small and medium-sized enterprises.
The tender will also take into account the carbon footprint of projects and their contribution to research and development, emphasizing innovation, high efficiency cells, and facilities of high value.
France has a goal of 5.4 GW in 2020, as well as a goal to heat 7 million homes with solar thermal technology. The nation seeks to create 100,000 – 130,000 jobs through solar energy, including 20,000 in the solar industry.


http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazin...-pv-plants.html
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/05/2013 11:22

Livingston’s Solar Installation Project Is Completed—Town is Now Producing its Own Free Energy

LIVINGSTON, NJ - At 200 years old, Livingston is still innovating—the town is now harnessing the sun’s energy to create some of its own free, quiet, completely renewable energy via its Solar Installation Project which began in 2012. Using solar power will cut down on the amount of pollution and greenhouse gasses the Township produces. In addition, even if the skies are overcast, solar panels still produce enough power to make them a worthwhile investment.

To make this possible, panels were installed on the rooftops of Town Hall (located at 357 South Livingston Ave.), the Livingston Public Library (located at 10 Robert Harp Drive), and at the Senior/Community Center (located at 204 Hillside Ave.). In addition, JCP&L recently assisted the Township with tying the panels into the electrical system at each building.

“Now that the cut-over is completed, we’re producing our own free energy,” stated Township Engineer Rich Calbi. “Decentralizing power in this way makes us more self-reliant. And solar cells require very little maintenance and can last 25 years or more.”

Calbi also said, “In exchange for installing the panels, we receive Solar Renewable Energy Credits, or SRECs, that we can sell on an open market. That will help offset the cost of installing the panels. In the future, this will also save us a considerable amount on energy bills.”

http://thealternativepress.com/articles/livingstons-solar-installation-project-is-comple
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/05/2013 11:45

SolarCity, Forest City Team to Install Solar on up to 6,500 Homes in Project at Navy, Marine Corps Bases in Hawai'i
MILILANI, Hawaii--Construction has started on the first phase of a massive solar project by Forest City Military Communities and SolarCity® (Nasdaq: SCTY) to provide solar electricity to 6,500 military family residences at Ohana Military Communities (OMC), which serves Navy Region Hawaii and Marine Corps Base Hawaii. The latest SolarStrong™ project is scoped for a planned 24 megawatts (MW) of generation capacity, which would make it the largest SolarCity has undertaken to date. SolarCity and Forest City have finished installing the first 700 kilowatts of solar capacity at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, and will soon initiate the first installations on Navy Region Hawaii. Representatives from Forest City and SolarCity will join in a traditional Hawaiian blessing today to celebrate the initiation of the project. SolarStrong, SolarCity's five-year plan to build more than $1 billion in solar energy projects for U.S. military housing communities, is expected to create up to 300 MW of solar generation capacity that could provide energy to as many as 120,000 military housing units.

Full story.

http://www.altenergymag.com/news/2013/05...91#.UYxMA7X7DLc
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 10/05/2013 18:14

Germany to cut Renewable Energy support

By Martin Lynch (European News Editor) — May 8, 2013 — Industrial Info Resources

Germany, one of Europe’s strongest supporters of green energy, is facing an overhaul of its renewable energy act that will see subsidies for renewable energy projects cut and more gas-fired power plants constructed.

German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has announced that she wants to see a reduction in the feed-in-tariffs (FiTs) paid to renewable projects in order to reduce the cost to the government and lower consumers’ electricity bills. At a recent Frankfurt conference she claimed the country needs a more balanced energy mix through the use of more conventional power plants based mainly on gas.

“We have to think about how to slow down the dynamics so that we get a sensible expansion of renewable energies but not a situation in which no gas-fired power plant can be operated profitably anymore and each gas plant has to be subsidized so it provides baseload capacity,” Merkel explained.

Merkel is echoing much of what Germany’s Federal Environment Minister, Peter Altmaier, called for in March when he received broad support for an overhaul of the renewable energy act, or the EEG. Merkel said that “in the coming months and at least one to two years” the government has to find a way to change the EEG law on subsidies.

Merkel wants to avoid voter backlash in the coming elections in September. German citizens have seen their electricity bills jump in recent years thanks to an increasing renewable energy charge. Merkel hopes that calling for cuts in renewable subsidies will keep voters on her side.

Merkel’s government made the knee-jerk decision in 2011 to abandon nuclear power following the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear disaster in Japan. It has shut a number of older plants already but it wants all 17 of its reactors offline by 2022.

Before Fukushima, Germany was getting around 22% of its power from those 17 nuclear reactors. Following the closure of the oldest eight reactors, that share has dropped to around 16%. Germany is facing an energy crisis in the coming decade once all of those pants are shut down. The government has admitted that it needs up to 20,000 megawatts (MW) of additional fossil-fuel powered plants built by 2020 – that’s double its previous estimate of 10,000 MW. For additional information, see June 16, 2011, article – Germany Needs 20 Gigawatts of Fossil-Fuel Power Plants.

However, the high price of gas and the low cost of cheap coal imports from the U.S. is making the construction of gas-fired plants unattractive to many energy companies in Germany, and Europe, as a whole.

Industrial Info Resources (IIR), with global headquarters in Sugar Land, Texas, and eight offices outside of North America, is the leading provider of global market intelligence specializing in the industrial process, heavy manufacturing and energy markets. Industrial Info’s quality-assurance philosophy, the Living Forward Reporting Principle™, provides up-to-the-minute intelligence on what’s happening now, while constantly keeping track of future opportunities.


Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 11/05/2013 13:25

GE to install wind turbines with integrated battery storage

he turbines are part of a planned 86-turbine installation at the site deploying GE’s Brilliant wind turbine which is the first turbine model to include integrated battery applications into the turbine system. Three powerful software applications work with the battery in these units in order to enable the provision of short-term predictable power and to enhance revenue potential for customers.

The 2.5-120 turbine, the launch of which was announced by GE in January, harnesses the power of the industrial internet to analyze thousands of data points every second in order to help manage wind variability and provide reliable short-term predictable power while communicating with neighbouring turbines, service technicians and operators. This enables the turbine to capture the wind for short-term energy storage, the first turbine to use battery storage as part of the complete turbine package.

The integration of the battery into the turbine allows wind farm operators to reap the benefits of energy storage without having to depend on farm-level batterage storage installation, which is expensive. The turbine design incorporates GE’s Durathon battery technology with three software applications creating an intelligent system which enables power producers and the turbines themselves to make data-informed decisions.

“With rapid expansion of the United States wind industry over the past five years, wind power plays an increasingly important role in America’s energy mix,” said Keith Longtin, general manager, wind product line for GE’s renewable energy business. “This new marriage of battery storage and advanced software within a wind turbine allows forward-thinking wind energy producers like Invenergy to shift the winds in its favor—increasing wind power’s efficiency and short-term predictability.”

The turbines are to be installed this year at the Goldthwaite Wind Energy facility in Central Texas which is expected to commence full commercial operation by the end of 2013. Invenergy will be among the first power producers to be able to test the benefits of data-driven, turbine-to-battery communication aimed at predicting wind power production in 15-60 minute increments.

”As America’s largest independent wind power generation company, innovation is critical to our continued industry leadership,” said Michael Polsky, Invenergy’s president and chief executive officer. “We’re pleased that this new brilliant turbine will provide cutting-edge technological advancements, particularly in renewable energy integration with storage.”

The software applications consist of ramp control, which enables the turbine to capture “wasted” wind power and store it in the battery, Predictable Power, which allows the turbine to smooth out short-term peaks and troughs in generated wind power and make it predictable over periods of 15-60 minutes, and Frequency Regulation, which allows the turbines to respond immediately to load changes with ultimate precision.

http://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/article/ge-to-install-wind-turbines-with-integrated-20130503
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 15/05/2013 21:21

Scotland looks to unlock renewables potential of its islands

Investing in clean energy projects on Scottish islands would help achieve the UK’s 2020 renewables target and create thousands of jobs for the local communities, a new study has said.
The report, published by the UK and the Scottish governments, found that while there are many opportunities to exploit wind, wave and tidal resources across the islands, there are also cost obstacles to overcome.
Compared to projects on the mainland, high costs of transport links are also likely to be a problem.
The study explains that the Scottish islands “offer some of the best sites for renewables projects anywhere in the UK, and indeed Europe, due to the high winds, waves and tidal flows.”
But at the same time, “Scottish island renewables projects, and onshore wind plant in particular, also incur comparatively higher costs which negate the benefits of the higher yields.”
The governments hope to overcome the challenges outlined, as unlocking the clean energy potential of the islands would help the UK decarbonise its energy market and benefit the locals, providing up to 10,000 direct and indirect jobs.
It would also help cut carbon and improve energy security on the islands.
Fergus Ewing, the Scottish minister for energy, enterprise and tourism, said, “Scotland’s islands are rich in renewable energy resources, and this independent report makes absolutely clear that they can make a cost-effective contribution to 2020 renewables and decarbonisation targets if issues around grid access and high transmission charging can be addressed.

http://blueandgreentomorrow.com/2013/05/...of-its-islands/
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/05/2013 08:52

Walmart Announces Completion of Eight New Solar Arrays in Massachusetts

WALPOLE, Mass., May 15, 2013 /PR Newswire/ -- Walmart today announced the completion of eight new solar photovoltaic (PV) arrays in Massachusetts with an event at its Walpole store, demonstrating the store's solar array for state and local officials, environmental leaders and other guests.
'The stores in Massachusetts demonstrate our commitment to increasing the share of renewable energy that powers our stores and improving energy efficiency,' said David Ozment, senior director of energy at Walmart. 'We believe in helping our customers live better by providing every day low cost and more environmentally friendly alternatives, like renewables. It's our goal to eventually be supplied by 100 percent renewable energy.'
With almost 10,000 panels, the solar PV arrays throughout the state will provide 2.8 million kilowatt hours (kWh) annually, saving approximately 1,484 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions (CO2e) annually – roughly the equivalent of taking 309 cars off the road.* The Walpole store alone will generate more than 380,000 kWh annually, saving roughly 200 metric tons of CO2e per year.
'Governor Patrick's leadership and our remarkable success in energy efficiency and solar energy have placed Massachusetts at the head of the clean energy revolution,' said Department of Energy Resources Commissioner Mark Sylvia. 'Investments from business leaders like Walmart have helped the Commonwealth meet our 250 megawatt solar goal four years early and earn the #1 national ranking in energy efficiency two years in a row.'
'The Environmental League of Massachusetts is proud to partner with Walmart, and appreciates Walmart's support of ELM's work with young people. Walmart has been an industry leader in combating climate change by incorporating energy efficiency and renewable energy technologies into their stores, and through their determination to make their suppliers as energy efficient as possible,' said George Bachrach, President of the Environmental League of Massachusetts, which received a $30,000 award from the Walmart Foundation to support educational programs. 'These are teachable moments for young people to learn practical methods for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.'
The United States' EPA Green Power Partnership program ranked Walmart as the number one on-site green power generator/consumer in the U.S in 2013. Globally, renewable energy projects provide one billion kilowatt hours annually, or about 4 percent of electricity for Walmart buildings. The grid supplies another 17 percent, for a total of 21 percent renewable electricity as of the end of 2012. Walmart has 280 renewable energy projects in operation or under development, and continues to test solar, fuel cells, microwind, offsite wind projects, green power purchases and more.
Greenskies Renewable Energy, LLC, is the installer and owner of the system, partnering with Walmart through a power purchase agreement where Walmart buys the electricity produced by the system. For the project, Greenskies used Massachusetts union labor. The inverter for the solar PV array is from Massachusetts-based Solectria Renewables.
'Working on this and other Massachusetts solar installations with Walmart has been a great experience for us,' said Andrew Chester of Greenskies, who gave a demonstration of solar technology to those in attendance. 'We are proud to partner with companies like Walmart to help them achieve their renewable energy goals by producing clean solar power and reducing their operating expenses.'

http://www.environmental-expert.com/news...chusetts-373358
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/05/2013 08:55

In Addition to Utah Solar Panels, Intermountain Wind and Solar Places a Heavy Focus on a New, High Efficiency Emergency Generator

With alternative energy sources becoming more prevalent, IM Wind and Solar is channeling some of their focus into the development of emergency back up power.

Salt Lake City, Utah (PRWEB) May 15, 2013

An emergency generator provides back up power Idaho and Utah.

In a world of constant development and progress, new discoveries in energy and power sources are constantly being addressed as a focal issue. Solar panels Utah are quickly becoming a more integrated part of home building. With fossil fuels diminishing and renewable energy becoming more obtainable, wind and solar power is growing increasingly more common in residential and commercial spaces. As the industry progresses, companies are focusing on providing these innovative developments and energy sources in more dire circumstances, such as mobile platforms or emergency situations.

Utilizing the benefits of a back up generator.

In the case of natural disasters or power outages, it’s necessary for individuals to have an emergency mode of power. Intermountain Wind and Solar are using their experience with alternative energy sources to provide a new and efficient generator that increases back up power Idaho. With multiple options available, these generators are cost effective methods to ensure buildings retain function in light of an emergency or temporary power outage.

The generators are connected to each individual home or commercial space, and power on when primary power sources fail. Within a few minutes, buildings are back up to full functionality. There isn’t a need to connect or plug anything in; since the generator is constructed as an integral part of the home’s structure, it automatically starts up when it is needed and shuts down when its uses are no longer necessary. The generators run on natural gas and propane, eliminating the need for continuous refueling. Similar to the way wind and solar power have become a common tool in alternative energy construction, generators such as these are becoming standard for emergency power outages.



Read more: http://www.virtual-strategy.com/2013/05/...c#ixzz2TP9otcjD
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/05/2013 15:48

100% renewables for Australia – not so costly after all

An exploratory study into 100% renewable energy scenarios for Australia has concluded that its impact on consumer electricity prices over the next few decades may be no more than the increases in the last few years to support much criticised network upgrades and the introduction of the carbon price.

The report by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) – you can access the executive summaryhere and the draft report here - canvasses the potential costs and practicality of transforming Australia’s coal-dependent electricity system to 100 per cent renewables, by either 2030 or 2050. It creates two scenarios – depending on the pace of falls in the cost of renewable and storage technologies – but both are considered conservative.

It concludes that the cost could range between $219 and $338 billion and would require wholesale electricity prices of $111-$133/MWh (more than double the current price). Unfortunately, and somewhat controversially, AEMO was not asked to compare these forecasts with “business as usual”, but it does provide one interesting set of data that does put it into some perspective.

Full Story
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/100-renewables-for-australia-not-so-costly-after-all-50218
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 16/05/2013 16:06

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
100% renewables for Australia – not so costly after all

An exploratory study into 100% renewable energy scenarios for Australia has concluded that its impact on consumer electricity prices over the next few decades may be no more than the increases in the last few years to support much criticised network upgrades and the introduction of the carbon price.

The report by the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) – you can access the executive summaryhere and the draft report here - canvasses the potential costs and practicality of transforming Australia’s coal-dependent electricity system to 100 per cent renewables, by either 2030 or 2050. It creates two scenarios – depending on the pace of falls in the cost of renewable and storage technologies – but both are considered conservative.

It concludes that the cost could range between $219 and $338 billion and would require wholesale electricity prices of $111-$133/MWh (more than double the current price). Unfortunately, and somewhat controversially, AEMO was not asked to compare these forecasts with “business as usual”, but it does provide one interesting set of data that does put it into some perspective.

Full Story
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/100-renewables-for-australia-not-so-costly-after-all-50218


Just remember YS that when a study is conducted they always base their conclusions on absolute best case scenario. In this case they would be considering optimal output(not actual output), Cheapest possible set up costs(not realistic setup costs) and zero delays in implementation once begun(not that that ever happens).
We should forget about industrial scale renewables for now. Get every household in the country as self sufficent as possible using solar and small scale wind and leave the rest to coal for the moment untill large scale renewables are far far more efficient.
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/05/2013 19:41

Siemens shuts down wind turbines worldwide after Southern California accident

A few hours after one of its wind turbines threw a blade in the Imperial County desert town of Ocotillo, builder Siemens Energy announced it is shutting down all its turbines worldwide that use the same blade until their safety can be assessed.

The faulty wind turbine at Pattern Energy’s Ocotillo Express Wind facility threw a ten-ton blade late Wednesday night or early Thursday. No one was injured, despite the blade’s coming to rest atop a Jeep trail on public lands approximately 150 yards from the turbine.

In a statement provided to ReWire, Siemens Energy said it would be “curtailing” — slowing or shutting down — all its turbines that use the blade in question:

A B53 rotor blade of a SWT-2.3-108 wind turbine broke off near the blade root and fell to the ground at the Ocotillo Wind project in California. No one was injured.

Siemens Energy has immediately convened a team of experts at the site who will examine all facets of this incident, including the production, installation, commissioning and service of the blade, which is under warranty by Siemens Energy.

Siemens does not yet know the root cause of this incident and is working to determine if and how this is related to a recent similar incident in Iowa.

Today, Siemens is taking the step of curtailing all turbines with the B53 blade type globally. These turbines will remain curtailed until it can be determined they are not at risk of a similar malfunction.

The Iowa incident took place in April at MidAmerican Holdings’ 200-megawatt Eclipse wind farm.

Siemens didn’t mention how many turbines would be affected by the shutdown. If it lasts for very long that spells trouble for facility owners, who depend on functioning turbines for their income. Ocotillo resident Parke Ewing, a neighbor of the facility, noted that Siemens staff had been working to cover the thrown blade with tarps all day Thursday. “We wonder if the variable winds in this area had anything to do with the incident, maybe causing extra stress on blade attachments,” Ewing told ReWire. “Winds on the ground [Wednesday] night were only 19 mph. The turbines should be able to withstand 130 mph winds.”

Link

Guess who was/is on the Sustainability Advisory Board of Siemens?

History of turbine/blade manufacturer Siemens is riddled with bribery, corruption, and other scandals:

Other cases of turbine collapses and blade failures involving Siemens equipment. In March 2010, a Siemens blade snapped off at Scotland’s largest wind farm, bringing the facility to a halt. In 2008, a Siemens turbine in Oregon collapsed, killing Chadd Mitchell, a worker who was also a young father and military veteran. Siemens paid a $10,500 fine. In April 2010, a blade snapped off a Siemens 2.3-108 turbine in Iowa. That’s the same model as the turbines in Ocotillo that lost a blade this morning.

Siemens recently exited the nuclear business after the Fukushima meltdowns. The company has had its own share of problems with its nuclear products including turbine blades that snapped off at a Michigan nuclear plant.


Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/05/2013 09:40

Oooohhhh isn't this gunna hurt!!!

Solar price rise to end power divide

AUSTRALIA'S one million rooftop solar households could be forced to pay new fixed charges to help recover billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies and make electricity prices fairer for all consumers.

A series of electricity industry reports has highlighted the inequity in existing power pricing where customers without solar panels are unfairly subsidising those with them.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national...x-1226650277855
Posted by: Brett Guy

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/05/2013 10:47

Thats just plain wrong.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/05/2013 11:12

Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
Oooohhhh isn't this gunna hurt!!!

Solar price rise to end power divide

AUSTRALIA'S one million rooftop solar households could be forced to pay new fixed charges to help recover billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies and make electricity prices fairer for all consumers.

A series of electricity industry reports has highlighted the inequity in existing power pricing where customers without solar panels are unfairly subsidising those with them.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national...x-1226650277855


No Surprises there who would be behind that....

a bit more from that story....

Quote:
Big generators are under pressure nationwide and openly discussing the possibility of a "death spiral" forced in part by renewables. For fans of creative destruction, the damage has been done. The electricity grid of tomorrow will be very different.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/05/2013 15:25

Battery to Bring Renewable Energy to the Grid



A new scalable, low-cost battery developed by scientists in the US could transform renewable energy into a viable supplier of power to the grid by helping to smooth out power fluctuations.
Researchers from Stanford University and the SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory of the US Department of Energy say the new battery is readily scalable while also providing the best balance to date between efficiency and cost – all necessary conditions for making renewable energy a major grid supplier.
“For solar and wind to be used in a significant way, we need a battery made of economic materials that are easy to scale and still efficient,” says Yi Cui, Stanford associate professor of materials science and engineering and a member of the Stanford Institute for Materials and Energy Sciences, a joint initiative launched by SLAC and Stanford University.
“We believe our new battery may be the best yet designed to regulate the natural fluctuations of these alternative energies.”
The new technology developed by Cui and his colleagues is a “flow” battery, which is easier to build on a larger scale than traditional batteries and better at accommodating the abrupt, sizeable shifts in the energy output which characterize solar and wind power facilities.

Existing flow batteries consist of two different liquids which are pumped through an interaction chamber. The chamber contains a membrane that only permits ions not involved in reactions to pass through the liquids, thus keeping the active ions physically separated.
While flow batteries are easy to build on a larger scale to better deal with the sharp output swings of weather-dependent renewable energy installations, they have thus far been severely hindered by two core drawbacks – the high cost of the liquids used in the battery, which contain rare and expensive materials such as vanadium, and the high cost of the separating membranes, which also require frequent maintenance work.
The flow batteries developed by Cui’s group mark a major advance upon their predecessors in precisely these areas. Their batteries dispense with the membrane because they make use of only a single stream of molecules, while their chief ingredients are lithium and sulphur, which are relatively cheap, commonplace elements.
The new design provides for a battery which is durable as well as economical.
“In initial lab tests the new battery also retained excellent energy-storage performance through more than 2,000 charges and discharges, equivalent to more than 5.5 years of daily cycles,” Cui said.
Large scale versions of the prototypes developed at Stanford could be capable of accommodating many megawatt-hours of energy, with the potential to transform wind and solar power into reliable grid suppliers by permitting to storage of their surplus output
http://designbuildsource.com.au/battery-to-bring-renewable-energy-to-the-grid
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/06/2013 01:12

Oh the irony..... smile

Australia's first commercial wind generation project to become accredited under the former national GreenPower project, Newcastle's iconic Kooragang Island wind turbine will be offered for sale.......

......opening up the land for a future coal-loader.

It’s future has been in doubt since it was revealed two years ago that the turbine’s concrete footings overlapped plans for a future ship turning bay, or swing basin, in the area.

Full story

Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/06/2013 12:18

No Fukushima radiation problems: report

(1) http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/wor...i-1226654915469


RADIATION leaked after Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011 is unlikely to cause any ill health effects in the future, says a UN scientific committee drawing up a major new report.

"Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi... did not cause any immediate health effects," the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) said.

"It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers for which dose histories have been assessed."

The committee, presenting after a meeting in Vienna the main findings of a report developed by 80 scientists from 18 countries due to be published later this year, also praised the actions of the Japanese government immediately after the March 2011 disaster.

"The actions taken by the authorities to protect the public (evacuation and sheltering) significantly reduced the radiation exposures that would have otherwise been received by as much as a factor of 10," UNSCEAR said.

"No radiation-related deaths have been observed among nearly 25,000 workers involved at the accident site. Given the small number of highly exposed workers, it is unlikely that excess cases of thyroid cancer due to radiation exposure would be detectable in the years to come," it added.

The world's worst nuclear accident in 25 years was caused when a huge tsunami triggered by an earthquake hammered Japan's northeastern Pacific coast, sending multiple reactors at the decades-old nuclear power plant into meltdown.

The tsunami also crushed whole communities and some 19,000 people were killed by the natural disaster, but no one is officially recorded as having died as a direct result of the radiation that spewed from the crippled units in the following months.
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/06/2013 12:30

Spare a thought though for the 70,000 "nuclear refugees"...

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2011/12/fukushima-inside-the-exclusion-zone/100202/
Posted by: Jax

Re: Renewable Energy News - 01/06/2013 18:14

Originally Posted By: SBT
No Fukushima radiation problems: report

(1) http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/wor...i-1226654915469


RADIATION leaked after Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011 is unlikely to cause any ill health effects in the future, says a UN scientific committee drawing up a major new report.

"Radiation exposure following the nuclear accident at Fukushima-Daiichi... did not cause any immediate health effects," the UN Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) said.

"It is unlikely to be able to attribute any health effects in the future among the general public and the vast majority of workers for which dose histories have been assessed."

The committee, presenting after a meeting in Vienna the main findings of a report developed by 80 scientists from 18 countries due to be published later this year, also praised the actions of the Japanese government immediately after the March 2011 disaster.

"The actions taken by the authorities to protect the public (evacuation and sheltering) significantly reduced the radiation exposures that would have otherwise been received by as much as a factor of 10," UNSCEAR said.

"No radiation-related deaths have been observed among nearly 25,000 workers involved at the accident site. Given the small number of highly exposed workers, it is unlikely that excess cases of thyroid cancer due to radiation exposure would be detectable in the years to come," it added.

The world's worst nuclear accident in 25 years was caused when a huge tsunami triggered by an earthquake hammered Japan's northeastern Pacific coast, sending multiple reactors at the decades-old nuclear power plant into meltdown.

The tsunami also crushed whole communities and some 19,000 people were killed by the natural disaster, but no one is officially recorded as having died as a direct result of the radiation that spewed from the crippled units in the following months.




Oh you can't be serious SBT? Do you actually believe that rubbish?
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 08:18

I didn't make any comments and for the record no I don't believe it.

But it is a newspaper report supposedly from the UN that I copied and pasted in the same manner I do for every article I post. I don't make any judgements on whether it is true or not I just post interesting articles in the areas I feel they should be placed. I will try and find a free copy of the UN report and post that later.

For the record.

I use the same layout for every article.

Bold Title

(1) link

Italics for the body of the article. Any comments are in plain text.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 08:25

The Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant accident

(1) http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/fukushima.html



UNSCEAR's assessment of levels and effects of radiation exposure due to the nuclear accident after the 2011 great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami

On 11 March 2011 the Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear power plant suffered major damage from the failure of equipment after the magnitude 9.0 great east-Japan earthquake and subsequent tsunami. It was the largest civilian nuclear accident since the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Radioactive material was released from the damaged plant and tens of thousands of people were evacuated.

UNSCEAR is in the process of finalizing a major study to assess the radiation doses and associated effects on health and environment. At the high-level meeting on nuclear safety and security convened in New York on 22 September 2011, the Secretary-General of the United Nations called on Member States to ensure that UNSCEAR has the necessary capacity and resources to accomplish its task. The work was also endorsed by the UN General Assembly resolution 66/70 on 9 December 2011. To date eighteen UN Member States have offered more than 80 experts to conduct the analytical work cost-free. When finalized, it will be the most comprehensive scientific analysis of the information available to date.

An interim report to the General Assembly (A/67/46) was issued in September 2012. The draft UNSCEAR Fukushima Report is scheduled to be discussed by the Scientific Committee at its 60th session (27-31 May 2013). When finalized, it will be presented to the General Assembly in October 2013.

Among others, the assessment is addressing the following questions:
•How much radioactive material was released and what was its composition?
•How was it dispersed over land and sea, and where are the hotspots?
•How does the accident compare with those at Chernobyl (1986), Three Mile Island (1979) and the Windscale Fire (1957)?
•What are the radiation effects on the environment and on foodstuffs?
•What is the likely radiation impact on human health and the environment?

The secretariat of UNSCEAR, as part of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), is closely coordinating with and involving other leading international organizations in this area:
•Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Organization ( CTBTO)
•Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations ( FAO)
•International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
•World Health Organization (WHO) and
•World Meteorological Organization (WMO)




Radiation Experts Meet in Vienna to Assess Effects of Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Accident

(1) http://www.unis.unvienna.org/unis/pressrels/2012/unisous128.html

VIENNA, 30 January (UN Information Service) - A week-long meeting of 60 international experts assessing for the United Nations the radiation exposures and health effects due to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan in March 2011 opens today.

"We are putting together a jigsaw puzzle, evaluating the exposures of the general public, of workers, and radiation effects, and looking for the missing pieces," said Wolfgang Weiss, Chair of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR).

"At this meeting, the groups will be exploring where there are critical gaps in the data that are available, where additional focus is required, and how to ensure the quality and reliability of what our assessment is based upon," Weiss said.

Japan is providing data to the Committee together with input from the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

There will be a preliminary report delivered to UNSCEAR's annual meeting (21-25 May) and a final report to the UN General Assembly in 2013.

The UNSCEAR assessment is being undertaken by four expert groups and the work was endorsed by resolution in the UN General Assembly last month. The 60 experts are provided cost free by 18 UN Member States.

Expansion of the Scientific Committee to 27 members from 21 was also approved by the General Assembly in December 2011. The new members are: Belarus, Finland, Pakistan, the Republic of Korea, Spain and Ukraine. Each State designates a scientist with associated advisers to represent it on the Committee.

***

The mandate of UNSCEAR, established in 1955, is to undertake broad reviews of the sources of ionizing radiation and the effects on human health and the environment. Its assessments provide a scientific foundation for the United Nations agencies and governments to formulate standards and programmes for protection against ionizing radiation.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 09:19

Report of the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Fifty-ninth session
(21-25 May 2012)


B. Present programme of work


(1) http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/V12/553/85/PDF/V1255385.pdf?OpenElement
Pages 4 and 5.


1. Nuclear accident following the great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami in 2011
5.

At its fifty-eighth session, the Scientific Committee had decided to carry out, once sufficient information was available, an assessment of the levels of exposure and radiation risks attributable to the nuclear power plant accident following the great east-Japan earthquake and tsunami of March 2011.
It had envisaged a preliminary document for consideration at the fifty-ninth session of the Committee,
and a more complete report for its sixtieth session, in 2013. The General Assembly had endorsed that decision in its resolution 66/70. The Committee discussed the preliminary document that summarized the planning, organization and technical progress of the work, as well as interim technical findings.

The assessment is a major undertaking and requires extensive quality-assurance checks of the data to
ensure that the final report will be authoritative.

6. States members and observers of the Committee and other selected countries had been invited to nominate experts to conduct the assessment at no cost to the United Nations. As of 18 March 2012, 72 experts from 18 countries had been offered, and they are now engaged in the work. In addition, three countries had made financial contributions to the general trust fund established by the Executive
Director of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) to receive and manage voluntary contributions to support the work of the Committee. Finally, in response to a request to consider offering an expert under a non-reimbursable loan arrangement, an expert from the Government of Japan had been offered and was now serving with the secretariat in Vienna.

7. Five international organizations are participating in the work: the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
The Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization has shared from its global network relevant data on measurements of radionuclides in the air. FAO is making available a database on radioactivity levels in foodstuffs since March 2011 and is assisting in the interpretation of relevant data for the assessment of radiation exposures resulting from food consumption.

IAEA made available results of measurements that its monitoring teams had conducted in Japan. WHO made
available a preliminary dose assessment based on official information available up to mid-September 2011, and agreed to share its expertise particularly for the assessment of radiation exposures due to food consumption. WMO will gather relevant meteorological data and related information, and develop a set of suitable meteorological analyses that can be used to estimate the atmospheric concentration
and surface deposition of radionuclides released.

8. Work so far has been focused on collecting and reviewing the material published in the scientific literature, defining the assessment methodologies and working arrangements, and defining processes for quality assurance of the data and assessment. There are many sources of data for the Committee’s evaluation:
(a) specific datasets in electronic formats, together with supplementary information, requested from the Government of Japan and authenticated Japanese sources;
(b) information on measurements made by other United Nations Member States, especially all other States members of the Scientific Committee, as well as Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, and solicited by the secretariat;
(c) compiled and checked datasets that are being made available by other United Nations organizations, including the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization, FAO, IAEA, WHO and WMO;
(d) information and independent analyses that are being published in peer-reviewed scientific journals; and
(e) crowdsourcing websites, where the public can upload their own measurements, which have also sprung up in Japan (while the use of such data calls for caution, they are nevertheless seen as having some value because they are independent from government sources).

9. The Committee is currently reviewing information that has been reported to it (in particular, the numerical data have not as yet been verified), which includes the following:
(a) To date, there have been no health effects attributed to radiation exposure
observed among workers, the people with the highest radiation exposures. To date, no health effects attributable to radiation exposure have been observed among children or any other member of the population;
(b) As of 31 January 2012, a total of 20,115 occupationally exposed people, comprising company workers (17 per cent) and external contractors (83 per cent) of the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO), were involved in the on-site mitigation activities. About 66 per cent of the workforce are reported to have received effective doses equal to or below 10 millisieverts (mSv).

In addition, rescuers and volunteers were occupationally exposed. Six TEPCO workers received effective doses above 250 mSv (the maximum reported dose as of 31 January 2012 was 679 mSv); the largest part of those doses resulted from intakes of 131I, 134Cs and 137Cs. About 170 occupationally exposed people received effective doses above 100 mSv. It should be emphasized that there are no data available in the open literature that allow estimates to be made of thyroid dose for occupationally exposed people.


The Committee has requested further information from the Japanese
authorities on worker doses and monitoring data;
(c) A system was established on 20 May 2011 for the management of radiation exposures and medical monitoring of occupationally exposed people involved in dealing with the emergency situation. As of 10 March 2012, none of the six deaths noted since 11 March 2011 had been attributed to exposure to ionizing radiation;
(d) Although there were several cases of occupationally exposed people with exposure to radiation from documented skin contamination, no clinically observable effects were reported;
(e) Thyroid monitoring of 1,080 children aged 15 years or younger in Iitate village, Kawamata town and Iwaki city (which are outside the 30-km zone) found no individual exceeding a screening level that was derived from a thyroid dose of 100 mSv (the maximum thyroid dose reported was 35 mSv). Some of the details of those measurements still need to be reviewed by the Committee. The Committee
will assess the thyroid doses of the exposed populations, particularly of young children;
(f) In late June 2011, the government of Fukushima Prefecture (2 million residents) initiated a survey of residents of Iitate village, Namie town and the Yamakiya district of Kawamata town. The survey is being extended to people living in other parts of the Prefecture. Its aim is to evaluate radiation exposure levels for all the people who were living in the Prefecture on 11 March 2011;

(g) Since March 2011, a database has been compiled on radionuclide concentrations in foodstuffs, under the guidance of FAO and IAEA and in collaboration with the Japanese authorities, including the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. As of 23 May 2012, approximately 165,000 records on food monitoring were available, including data for over 500 types of foodstuffs, sampled in 47 prefectures in Japan. The Committee will analyse that database for use in assessing the radiation exposure of the general public from food consumption;

(h) Only a few studies have been published on exposure to non-human biota arising from the releases of radionuclides in which dose rates to biota have been estimated explicitly. Those studies show somewhat contrasting results. The highest exposures of wildlife appear to be associated with the marine environment.


Here is the source of the news paper article. It states in plain language that they have zero clinically reported deaths or major injures (Bolded and underlined by myself in article above) due to radiation exposure.

Believe it or not this is the official stance from the UN. Now as an organisation they deplore Nuclear power and if they had not been unbiased in the reporting it would have read a lot different to what it has stated above.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 10:28

What on earth does nuclear energy have to do with Renewable energy news?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 11:58

Quote:
Renewable energy is clean, cheap and here – what's stopping us?


Energies such as solar and wind have seen dramatic price falls. The revolution in non-grid energy should be embraced by the UK

The report from the Committee on Climate Change arguing that investing in renewable energy would eventually save consumers a lot of money is spot on.

We are regularly told by conventional utility companies, many politicians and commentators that energies such as solar and wind are hopelessly expensive and reliant on enormous subsidy.

But this is simply wrong. Renewables have seen such dramatic price fallsin the past few years that they are threatening to upset the world as we know it and usher in an almost unprecedented boom in the spread of cheap, clean, home-produced energy.


Solar will be the cheapest form of power in many countries within just a few years. In places such as California and Italy it has already reached so-called "grid parity". Onshore wind, on a piece of land not constrained by years of planning delays, is already the cheapest form of energy on earth. These are not wild claims – those are figures from General Electric, Citibank and others.

Solar PV, the area in which my company operates, is a case in point. Three years ago firms like ours were paying about €3,600 per installed kilowatt of solar capacity on barn roofs in Germany. Today it can be done for just over €1,000 – a staggering 70% fall. That is seriously cheap and will just keep getting cheaper.

Thanks to a surge in global production to 60 gWp annually, (enough to supply British households – not offices or factories – with all their electricity) solar power has dropped dramatically in price. But there is more to come. Cambridge IP, a global innovation and intellectual property firm, says there is a surge of interest and R&D into two new forms of solar power which are likely to be available commercially by the end of this decade.


Newly built solar plants are already considerably cheaper than new nuclear plants per kilowatt hour of electricity produced and we are almost at the stage where we don't need a guaranteed price (known as a feed-in tariff) because solar energy will compete head on with conventional energy.

True, there is an ongoing cost from the German government's previous support for solar, but is much lower than the subsidies pumped by the western world into nuclear, coal, oil and gas over the past decades.

It is always amazing how a tax cut announced by George Osborne for North Sea oil and gas industry is greeted as somehow being good for Britain whereas any support for renewables is immediately dubbed a subsidy by the conventional energy companies wedded to their dying business model. A tax cut is a subsidy by another name. And remember the estimated £100bn plus cost to future taxpayers of disposing of Britain's dangerous pile of nuclear waste.

And solar is starting to pay its subsidy back. Germany now has more than 30 gigaWatt peak (gWp) of solar plants installed, such that on almost all days in the spring, summer and autumn, solar energy surges into the grid at a time when demand is at is strongest (air conditioning etc is running like mad) and when spot market energy prices are at their highest.

This peak price is being forced down by solar, helping to reduce wholesale prices. The big energy companies hate this because this peak is where they make their money. Solar in Germany is almost down to wholesale prices – in sunnier countries it already is.

This brings me on to a really exciting development . Our company is starting to sell power directly from the barn roofs we have our plants on to the farmers who own the roofs and nearby towns wishing to rescue themselves from the grasp of the RWEs and E.ONs of this world.

Why? Because we can produce power at around half of what farmers are paying.

This so-called "distributed" (ie non-grid) energy is where the real revolution is taking place. Distributed energy not only saves on the huge amount of energy lost in grid distribution, but it helps lighten the load on the grid. Whole German towns are going completely renewable. The citizens get cheaper, cleaner power. If only Britain would get this.

Just to be clear – Germany (Europe's biggest economy) now gets 25% of its electricity from renewables – a proportion that is increasing by the month. This is twice the level of the UK, although, interestingly, similar to that of Scotland on its own. Germany is also leading on figuring out how to overcome the problems of "intermittency" by storing renewable energy. I agree with the sceptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg that much of the world's efforts to reduce emissions in the past couple of decades have been a waste of time. I also agree with him on the need for a surge in R&D to provide a cheap, renewable-energy-powered future. It is just that I think that future is already here, not decades away. And nuclear power is already a thing of the past


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/01/renewable-energy-clean-cheap-uk
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 13:04

I notice that, that Guardian article failed to mention the fact that over in Germany the truth is that 15% of their population have had their electricity cut off for being unable to pay their high bills! Every year 600,000 households (2 million people) are getting their power switched off in Germany because they can’t afford the skyrocketing electric bills.

Over 10 years ago Germany enacted the Renewable Energy Feed-In Act (EEG) which requires power companies to pay small producers of renewable energy exorbitant rates for their green power. The power companies in turn simply pass the higher prices on to their customers. Electricity prices rose 10% in 2011 alone!

So far Germany has committed over 100 billion euros to renewable energy (May 2012), all to be paid for by the consumer. Little wonder that today almost a seventh of Germany’s population is now living in “energy poverty”.

Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 02/06/2013 13:24

Qld just had a 22.6% electricity cost increase in one hit yesterday.

What is happening in Germany will be repeated here as well.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 10:40

Originally Posted By: SBT
Qld just had a 22.6% electricity cost increase in one hit yesterday.

What is happening in Germany will be repeated here as well.


It is also funny everyone is quick to blame renewable BUT as you mentioned power prices in Qld have gone up another 26% yet Qld is the state with the least amount of renewables....
Funny how power prices always continue to skyrocket once electricity has been privatised (even though they claim that they won't smirk ) it is also funny how power cost never jumped so much when the power companies were in Government hands, oh how quick some forget..... smile
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 10:43

Originally Posted By: snafu
I notice that, that Guardian article failed to mention the fact that over in Germany the truth is that 15% of their population have had their electricity cut off for being unable to pay their high bills! Every year 600,000 households (2 million people) are getting their power switched off in Germany because they can’t afford the skyrocketing electric bills.

Over 10 years ago Germany enacted the Renewable Energy Feed-In Act (EEG) which requires power companies to pay small producers of renewable energy exorbitant rates for their green power. The power companies in turn simply pass the higher prices on to their customers. Electricity prices rose 10% in 2011 alone!

So far Germany has committed over 100 billion euros to renewable energy (May 2012), all to be paid for by the consumer. Little wonder that today almost a seventh of Germany’s population is now living in “energy poverty”.



And would the situation be any different if renewables were not on the scene? i highly doubt that!
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 11:27

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
It is also funny everyone is quick to blame renewable BUT as you mentioned power prices in Qld have gone up another 26% yet Qld is the state with the least amount of renewables....

Queensland Energy Minister Mark McArdle said network costs controlled by the Australian Energy Regulator accounted for nearly 47 per cent of the hike, while carbon tax and renewable energy schemes contributed a further 15 per cent.

Queensland, whether it likes it or not, is part of the Eastern Grid (QLD, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA), which means its fine citizens end up paying for wind power perversion too. It is part of an Intra-State distribution system and, therefore, subject to the obscene cost attached to power bills by the REC Tax.

And don’t be sucked in by the reference to “network costs” as the principal contributor to the 23% increase in power prices in the Sunshine State. The need to duplicate the transmission network simply to accommodate intermittent and unreliable wind power is a very big factor in escalating “network costs”.

In just one example, reported by The Age, network operators are ready to spend $107 million on an inter-connector for the sole purpose of sending South Australia’s wind power to Victorians at night-time, when there is absolutely no market for it.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 13:05

Originally Posted By: snafu
Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
It is also funny everyone is quick to blame renewable BUT as you mentioned power prices in Qld have gone up another 26% yet Qld is the state with the least amount of renewables....

Queensland Energy Minister Mark McArdle said network costs controlled by the Australian Energy Regulator accounted for nearly 47 per cent of the hike, while carbon tax and renewable energy schemes contributed a further 15 per cent.

Queensland, whether it likes it or not, is part of the Eastern Grid (QLD, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA), which means its fine citizens end up paying for wind power perversion too. It is part of an Intra-State distribution system and, therefore, subject to the obscene cost attached to power bills by the REC Tax.

And don’t be sucked in by the reference to “network costs” as the principal contributor to the 23% increase in power prices in the Sunshine State. The need to duplicate the transmission network simply to accommodate intermittent and unreliable wind power is a very big factor in escalating “network costs”.

In just one example, reported by The Age, network operators are ready to spend $107 million on an inter-connector for the sole purpose of sending South Australia’s wind power to Victorians at night-time, when there is absolutely no market for it.


Originally Posted By: Snafu
In just one example, reported by The Age, network operators are ready to spend $107 million on an inter-connector for the sole purpose of sending South Australia’s wind power to Victorians at night-time, when there is absolutely no market for it.


How is there no need for it whistle aren't you the one who always bangs on about how the eastern states of Australia needs a minimum of 18,000 MW @ 3.00am smirk

How do you explain poor old WA sitting over there all by itself with the bulk of it's electricity been generated by fossils.... and look how much more expensive their utilities are in comparison crazy
Adelaide..


Brisbane..


Perth..



And both QLD and WA are both supposedly reaping the benefits of a resources BOOM? they are the ones digging the bulk of the coal out of the ground yet they are paying the most..so it seems whistle
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 16:51

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
How is there no need for it whistle aren't you the one who always bangs on about how the eastern states of Australia needs a minimum of 18,000 MW @ 3.00am smirk

That's right YS. I did say that eastern Australia (QLD, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA) requires a minimum of 18,000 MW @ 3.00am.

Victoria itself though only requires ~3,900MW @ 3:00am. wink

whistle

And I don't have to 'bang on about it'.....it's a fact...plain and simple.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 03/06/2013 20:53

Originally Posted By: snafu
Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
How is there no need for it whistle aren't you the one who always bangs on about how the eastern states of Australia needs a minimum of 18,000 MW @ 3.00am smirk

That's right YS. I did say that eastern Australia (QLD, NSW, Vic, Tas and SA) requires a minimum of 18,000 MW @ 3.00am.

Victoria itself though only requires ~3,900MW @ 3:00am. wink

whistle

And I don't have to 'bang on about it'.....it's a fact...plain and simple.


Well that is good then smile so the power is needed after all smile
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/06/2013 20:10

Dominic Lawson: There Are Green Vested Interests Too, Mr Davey

Date: 04/06/13

(1)http://www.thegwpf.org/dominic-lawson-green-vested-interests-too-davey/

(2) http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comm...ey-8642710.html

Dominic Lawson, The Independent

Opposition to renewables is not “ideological”. Those who are opposing Davey’s Energy Bill do so because they see no good in making poor households poorer

Few are so cross as the politician who is losing an argument. This might explain the eruption of anger by that most mild-mannered of ministers, Ed Davey. [...]



Davey accused such opponents of “destructive and loudly clamouring scepticism born of vested interest, nimbyism, publicity-seeking controversialism or sheer blinkered, dogmatic, political bloody-mindedness”. In this, he was echoing his royal host’s remarks a few weeks back that such people were “corporate lobbyists” turning the Earth into “a dying patient”.

Some cynics will argue that Davey’s tirade was designed to appease Greens furious that he is not backing the amendment to the Energy Bill by Tim Yeo: the Tory chairman of the Commons Energy and Climate Change committee is proposing a much higher rate of emissions reduction. Yeo, at least, is not as hysterical as the heir to the throne. Last week, he admitted that: “The first thing is to say that climate change does not represent any threat to the survival of the planet. None at all.” Indeed, last month the journal Geophysical Research Letters published a paper based on study of satellite photographs of the driest regions of North America, the Middle East and parts of Africa, which found that foliage had increased by 11 per cent over the past 30 years. The scientists behind the research argue that this could have been a direct result of increased CO2 emissions. What else would you expect from something called “The Greenhouse effect”?

No, the issue is not the planet: it is a question of what is in the interests of those living on it. The way Davey tells it, all those on the other side of the argument from him and Prince Charles are just representatives of vested interests and corporate lobbyists, while those pushing to have the country and the coastline covered by wind turbines are motivated purely by disinterested concern for the national welfare.

This is amusing. Tim Yeo himself has been receiving handy sums of money from Green energy companies – Eco City and TMO Renewables, for example. Last year alone (we know this from his declaration of interests), Yeo took more than £135,000 from such firms. Meanwhile, his like-minded colleague in the House of Lords, the former Tory Environment Secretary John Gummer, now the head of the “independent” Committee on Climate Change, was until very recently chairman of Forewind, a business dedicated to the construction of the world’s largest offshore wind farm, in the North Sea. That job has now been seamlessly taken on by another Tory MP, Charles Hendry, who until last year was a minister in the Department of Energy and Climate Change.

If it still isn’t sinking in, cast your eye over the list of organisations which yesterday called on MPs to vote for Yeo’s amendment to the Energy Bill. They include the Carbon Capture and Storage Association, the Solar Trade Association and the Renewable Energy Association. These are all trade lobbyists, increasingly anxious about the future of the vast public subsidies on which their business model depends.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/06/2013 21:29

US Approves 520 Megawatts Of Major Renewable Energy Projects

The U.S. Secretary of the Interior today announced the approval of three major renewable energy projects totalling 520 megawatt capacity.

Combined, the projects will deliver enough clean power to supply the electricity needs of nearly 200,000 homes and will create hundreds of jobs.

The 100-megawatt Quartzsite Solar Project in Arizona project will use concentrating solar thermal technology and will be situated on 1,600 acres of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management administered lands. The facility will generate enough electricity to meet the needs of an estimated 30,000 homes. The solar farm will use dry-cooling technology to minimize water consumption.

The 350-megawatt Midland Solar Project in Nevada is solar panel based and will provide enough electricity to power about 105,000 homes.

The 70 megawatt New York Canyon Geothermal Project in Lovelock, Nevada will provide enough power to serve around 60,000 households.

"These projects reflect the Obama Administration's commitment to expand responsible domestic energy production on our public lands and diversify our nation's energy portfolio," Secretary Jewell said. "Today’s approvals will help bolster rural economies by generating good jobs and reliable power and advance our national energy security."

In all projects, the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) worked closely with stakeholders to minimize potential environmental impacts.

25 utility-scale solar farms, 9 wind farms and 11 geothermal plants have been approved by the Department of the Interior since 2009. When all have been constructed, they will represent a total of 12,500 megawatts of capacity, enough electricity to power more than 4.4 million homes. The Department surpassed President Obama's goal of authorizing 10,000 MW of renewable energy projects on public lands by the end of 2012.

http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3774
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/06/2013 21:33

Cheap Batteries for Backup Renewable Energy

A battery made of cheap materials could store power when it’s windy for use when it’s not.

Investors recently chipped in $15 million to fund battery startup EOS Energy Storage, a company that says its batteries could eventually compete with natural-gas power plants to provide power during times of peak demand.

Cheap energy storage is becoming increasingly important as greater numbers of wind turbines and solar panels are added to the grid. If renewable energy is to replace the fossil fuels that dominate power supplies and serve to backup wind turbines and solar panels, very large-scale, inexpensive batteries like the ones EOS is developing will be needed (see “Wind Turbines, Battery Included, Can Keep Power Supplies Stable,” “Battery Could Provide a Cheap Way to Store Solar Power,” and “A Solution to Solar Power Intermittency”).

EOS is trying to commercialize a type of battery that’s based on inexpensive materials: water, zinc, and air (see “Startup Promises a Revolutionary Grid Battery” and “Years in the Making, Promising Rechargeable Metal-Air Batteries Head to Market”). Such batteries—in which zinc reacts with oxygen in air to generate electricity—have been around for a long time, but it’s been difficult to make them rechargeable. Electrodes deteriorate, for example, and the batteries are inherently inefficient because of the difference in voltage levels when charging and discharging them—they waste nearly half the energy it takes to charge them.

EOS has addressed these issues in a couple of ways. It uses a slightly acidic water-based electrolyte that helps prevent deformations of the zinc electrode that can damage the battery.

The company is also supplementing the zinc-oxygen reaction with reactions between zinc and a mixture of up to six other materials (it won’t identify the type of compounds). The other reactions help reduce the difference between charge and discharge voltages, improving the efficiency from 60 percent to almost 75 percent. The mixture of reactions makes the battery more difficult to operate, but George Adamson, vice president of R&D, says that today’s battery management software is up to the task.

The decision to make use of these extra reactions was the result of a bit of serendipity. Impurities were causing unwanted side reactions in the original zinc-air prototypes. But then the researchers noticed the beneficial impact on voltage. “Once we realized that,” Adamson says, “we started searching on purpose for multiple combinations of reactions.”


EOS has built a two-kilowatt prototype. Eventually, its batteries will be packaged inside a shipping container to make one-megawatt batteries than can store six megawatt-hours of electricity, enough to power a typical U.S. home for six months. It plans to build a pilot manufacturing plant by the end of the year or early next year, and to start making full-size one-megawatt batteries by the end of 2014.

EOS wants to produce batteries that cost as little as $160 per kilowatt-hour and last for 30 years. Current batteries that cheap would fail after only a couple of years of service. The U.S. Department of Energy has set a goal of batteries at $100 per kilowatt-hour that can be recharged 5,000 times with 80 percent efficiency, saying that at that point batteries could be widely adopted for grid storage. EOS says its batteries can last 10,000 charges, which could make up for the higher upfront cost and lower efficiency of its batteries.

But the company hasn’t reached its goals yet. It says it’s “well within” $300 per kilowatt-hour. EOS has completely charged and discharged the most recent iteration of its battery cells over 1,000 times, and the batteries have so far retained 90 percent of their capacity. Typically, batteries are designed to retain 80 percent of their capacity at the end of their life, so the current rate of capacity loss is too fast for a 10,000-cycle battery.

But, Adamson says, much of the capacity loss is from electrolyte levels falling too low. In one experiment, topping off the batteries restored capacity from 80 percent to 96 percent of the original capacity. Manufactured batteries will come with a mechanism for automatically topping off the electrolyte, which could improve the durability of the system.

EOS says it’s teaming up with seven utility companies to test the battery and design it to the performance specifications they need—it will announce the partners in the next couple of weeks.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/515076/cheap-batteries-for-backup-renewable-energy/
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 04/06/2013 22:08

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
US Approves 520 Megawatts Of Major Renewable Energy Projects

The U.S. Secretary of the Interior today announced the approval of three major renewable energy projects totalling 520 megawatt capacity.

Combined, the projects will deliver enough clean power to supply the electricity needs of nearly 200,000 homes and will create hundreds of jobs.

The 100-megawatt Quartzsite Solar Project in Arizona project will use concentrating solar thermal technology and will be situated on 1,600 acres of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management administered lands. The facility will generate enough electricity to meet the needs of an estimated 30,000 homes. The solar farm will use dry-cooling technology to minimize water consumption.

The 350-megawatt Midland Solar Project in Nevada is solar panel based and will provide enough electricity to power about 105,000 homes.

The 70 megawatt New York Canyon Geothermal Project in Lovelock, Nevada will provide enough power to serve around 60,000 households.

"These projects reflect the Obama Administration's commitment to expand responsible domestic energy production on our public lands and diversify our nation's energy portfolio," Secretary Jewell said. "Today’s approvals will help bolster rural economies by generating good jobs and reliable power and advance our national energy security."

In all projects, the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) worked closely with stakeholders to minimize potential environmental impacts.

25 utility-scale solar farms, 9 wind farms and 11 geothermal plants have been approved by the Department of the Interior since 2009. When all have been constructed, they will represent a total of 12,500 megawatts of capacity, enough electricity to power more than 4.4 million homes. The Department surpassed President Obama's goal of authorizing 10,000 MW of renewable energy projects on public lands by the end of 2012.

http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3774

What happens if they get a day or more of no sun?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 08:24

Originally Posted By: snafu
What happens if they get a day or more of no sun?


I think they would class that as night time if there were no sun....
The area where it is receives around 300 sunny days per year and when it is cloudy it would reduce the output but it would still produce power.


US Department of Interior gives green light to Quartzsite CSP plant in Arizona

Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell has announced the approval of three major renewable energy projects including the SolarReserve's 100 MW Quartzsite CSP plant to be built in Arizona.
Besides the Quartzsite project, a 350 MW photovoltaic plant and a 70 MW geothermal plant, both in Nevada have also been approved, “These projects reflect the Obama Administration's commitment to expand responsible domestic energy production on our public lands and diversify our nation's energy portfolio,” Secretary Jewell said. “Today’s approvals will help bolster rural economies by generating good jobs and reliable power and advance our national energy security.”
The planned Quartzsite Concentrated Solar Power plant will use central receiver (tower) technology with molten salt has heat transfer fluid. This is the same technology being deployed in the under construction Crescent Dunes plant. This technology allows the plant to store thermal energy as hot molten salt that may be later turned into electricity after the sunset.
Despite this step ahead in the process, the plant needs a power purchase agreement (PPA) with an utility. Andrew Wang, SolarReserve's Director of Development, has reportedly said that late 2015 would be the earliest the plant could come online if a PPA were secured tomorrow.
SolarReserve, as available at CSP World's map, has more projects in the pipeline. The above mentioned Crescent Dunes is a 110 MW plant being built near Tonopah in Nevada, it will be the first project to come on line. The Rice Solar Energy Project, a 150 MW plant which was approved by California Energy Commission on December, 2010 has secured a PPA with PG&E.Termosolar Alcazar is 50 MW plant approved in Spain. Another planned projects are Saguache Solar Energy Project (200 MW) in Colorado and Crossroads (150 MW) in Arizona.
Since 2009 Interior has approved 25 utility-scale solar facilities, 9 wind farms and 11 geothermal plants, with associated transmission corridors and infrastructure to connect to established power grids. When built, these projects could provide more than 12,500 megawatts of power, or enough electricity to power more than 4.4 million homes, and support an estimated 17,000 construction and operations jobs.
Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has identified an additional 15 active renewable energy proposals slated for review this year and next. The BLM identified these projects through a process that emphasizes early consultation and collaboration with its sister agencies at Interior – the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service.
“The President has called for America to continue taking bold steps on clean energy,” said the BLM Principal Deputy Director Neil Kornze. “Our smart-from-the-start analysis has helped us do just that, paving the way for responsible development of utility-scale renewable energy projects in the right way and in the right places.”
All three projects underwent extensive environmental review and public comment. The companies agreed to undertake significant mitigation efforts to minimize impacts to wildlife, water, historical, cultural and other resources.

The Quartzsite Solar Project, located in La Paz County, Arizona, about was proposed by Quartzsite Solar Energy, LLC, a subsidiary of Solar Reserve, LLC (Santa Monica, CA). The 100-megawatt project will use concentrating solar “power tower” technology to drive steam turbine generators with heliostats on 1,600 acres of BLM-managed lands.

The Quartzsite Solar Energy Project will employ dry-cooling technology, which requires a fraction of the water needed for wet-cooling. The project is expected to create 438 jobs during peak construction and 47 full-time operations and maintenance jobs. When operational, the facility will generate enough clean power to meet the needs of an estimated 30,000 homes. Click here for a fact sheet on the Quartzsite Solar Project and here for a map.

The Midland Solar Project is a 350-megawatt solar photovoltaic facility. Proposed by Boulder Solar Power, LLC, the project will be built on private lands about 7 miles southwest from Boulder City, Nevada and will cross 76 acres of federal transmission corridor. The project will provide enough electricity to power about 105,000 homes and generate a peak construction workforce of about 350 employees and up to 10 permanent jobs. Boulder Solar Power, LLC worked closely with the BLM, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Nevada Department of Wildlife to develop monitoring and conservation measures that will avoid, minimize and mitigate potential impacts.

The project’s infrastructure, for example, was minimized to reduce ground disturbance. Less than 6.7 acres of native plant communities, which provide habitat to nesting migratory birds, will be eliminated as a result of the proposed facility. In addition, the project will obtain water from the existing Boulder City Public Works Department main pipeline, so that surface waters will not be diverted from areas of perennial flow or ephemeral washes, or from downstream habitats that depend on that water. Click here for a fact sheet on the Midland Solar Project and here for a map.

The New York Canyon Geothermal Project and electrical transmission facility will be built on 15,135 acres of land managed by the BLM about 25 miles east of Lovelock, Nevada in Pershing County. TGP Dixie Development Company, LLC, a subsidiary of TerraGen Power, LLC, will build the 70-megawatt project and associated 230-kilovolt electrical line. The project will provide enough electricity to power about 60,000 homes and create an estimated 150 peak construction jobs and 16 full- and part-time operational jobs. The BLM worked closely with its partners and stakeholders to minimize environmental impacts. For example, a Bird and Bat Conservation Strategy was developed to assess the area’s avian wildlife and reduce impacts on these populations. In addition, there are no listed, proposed or candidate threatened or endangered species present in the project area. Click here for a fact sheet on the New York Canyon Geothermal Project and here for a map.

http://www.csp-world.com/news/20130604/0...p-plant-arizona
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 09:08

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
Originally Posted By: snafu
What happens if they get a day or more of no sun?


I think they would class that as night time if there were no sun....
The area where it is receives around 300 sunny days per year and when it is cloudy it would reduce the output but it would still produce power.


Still leaves 65 days of limited or potentially no power produced. That means they can expect good electrical capacity 82% of the time. It doesn't take a lot of cloud to seriously impede the generation of solar power, I can't recall my figures but I remember thinking it was surprising just how much the power output from our arrays dropped when some Cu drifted in front of the sun let alone on days when you have 8/8 cloud of thin to moderate thickness.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 09:10

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak

I think they would class that as night time if there were no sun....


Or a nuclear winter.

Im sure Arizona will be fine for Solar energy, very sunny part of the world and vast amounts of empty land.

I can't believe that people on weatherzone try to argue that Arizona is too cloudy for Solar, you guys are crazy. Is it because you are afraid that the more solar and wind becomes adopted it means you are losing your campaign against AGW ?

I sense fear and desperation in these arguments against renewable energy. Next you guys will say the Atacama is too cloudy for solar smirk
Posted by: davidg

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 09:22

Can solar provide reliable base load power 365 days a year using current technology? No.

Will developing technologies allow this to happen in the near future? Yes.

Investing in large scale "solar farms" while the technology is still in its infancy is misguided to say the least. Thermal storage and efficient air driven turbines are the future for solar technology.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 09:32

Early adopters always pay more but it's the way it is with all technology. They eventually pave the way for cheaper solutions in the future, higher efficiencies and cheaper manufacturing etc.
I agree that storage will be a key feature in the future, but how far away is that ?

Would the technology progress if there was no interest in it now ?
Just look at gaming consoles as an example, they start their cycle at $800 and by the end they are half the size and $200. Would this happen without shmucks like me paying $800 on launch day ?


The people building the solar farms obviously think they have a workable business model.
Posted by: davidg

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 09:46

Australia is actively developing the technology for Thermal storage and concentrated solar energy. We are already heavily invested in renewables through research and the development of power generation facilities where appropriate. Sure it'd be great to see more investment in solar and geothermal power but IMO its simply a matter of placing the horse before the cart. Failure to provide reliable cost effective power generation will only weaken the opportunities for renewables to be considered as a viable option.

If the console that you paid $800 for was unreliable and you were unable to play the games that you had paid for, would you buy another console or would you build a PC gaming rig?
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 10:09

My xbox died the day i got it lol and went straight back and got another.

I built a PC gaming rig eventually, but even they show the same early adopter price declines. $800 GPUs eventually drop to half of that and they are still perfectly fine for 99% of users who don't need 60fps on triple screens.

The same will happen with solar, we will see a few plants built more so just as demonstrations that it can be done and because the general population wants it done. Then we will see price declines as the technology matures and we should see more serious long term plants built.

Then you have the politics, humans like visual stimulus, so we like to see that something is being done. The visual of a solar farm peaks interest in people, potentially winning votes in some USA states. We have to remember that the Western United States is very different to Australia, they are making a big push into trying to reduce pollution. California in particular prides its self as a trend setter, they have very progressive green regulations.

We have to sometimes remember that the green hatred on weatherzone is not indicative of views everywhere. what people see as waste of money here is seen as making progress elsewhere.
Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 10:21


No mention of the subsidies in the projects.

What are the government contributions to capital and the on-going operating subsidies.
Posted by: davidg

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 11:05

Originally Posted By: Enrique
My xbox died the day i got it lol and went straight back and got another.

I built a PC gaming rig eventually, but even they show the same early adopter price declines. $800 GPUs eventually drop to half of that and they are still perfectly fine for 99% of users who don't need 60fps on triple screens.

The same will happen with solar, we will see a few plants built more so just as demonstrations that it can be done and because the general population wants it done. Then we will see price declines as the technology matures and we should see more serious long term plants built.

Then you have the politics, humans like visual stimulus, so we like to see that something is being done. The visual of a solar farm peaks interest in people, potentially winning votes in some USA states. We have to remember that the Western United States is very different to Australia, they are making a big push into trying to reduce pollution. California in particular prides its self as a trend setter, they have very progressive green regulations.

We have to sometimes remember that the green hatred on weatherzone is not indicative of views everywhere. what people see as waste of money here is seen as making progress elsewhere.


If you filter out the extreme opposing views I think the discussion on WZ is actually quite informative.

I think you miss my point. People proclaim that Australia is not investing in solar or geothermal etc. on a large enough scale. I contend that they are investing proportional to the maturity of the technology. Gaming analogies aside, energy infrastructure does not suddenly become obsolete in the way consumer products do. Plant upgrade cycles are in decades, not years or months. It pays long term to remain conservative and to invest in research rather than "blowing your dough" on large scale renewables when the technology is not mature enough to provide the type of reliability that is required.

Its not a case of simply throwing money at it, as attractive politically that may sound. If you have seen the excellent ABC series Hollowmen, you'll know what I mean.
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 11:28

I don't think the discussion here is informative at all, we have threads title "alternative energy scam" for one and the opposing dirty coal thread. people also get to attached to policy in countries other than Australia, they fear the spread of renewables.

We have to remember that most of these articles are not even Australian, we have no say in what California or Arizona chooses to do. If they want to be industry leaders then good for them, we will only gain from their knowledge.

They are progressive economies that are much larger than our own and they have been on the leading edge of technology for 50+ years, it's cultural. It's all well and good knocking potential projects here if we find it's not affordable, but the constant grating at other nations bugs me. California was at the leading edge for clean air laws, seat belt laws, unleaded gasoline and now hybrid vehicles and solar.

People here just need to admit that some of these other economies have and will continue to be more progressive than ours. Australia has always been associated with research and not adoption, it's a cultural thing.

Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 11:38

Originally Posted By: Andy Double U
Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
Originally Posted By: snafu
What happens if they get a day or more of no sun?


I think they would class that as night time if there were no sun....
The area where it is receives around 300 sunny days per year and when it is cloudy it would reduce the output but it would still produce power.


Still leaves 65 days of limited or potentially no power produced. That means they can expect good electrical capacity 82% of the time. It doesn't take a lot of cloud to seriously impede the generation of solar power, I can't recall my figures but I remember thinking it was surprising just how much the power output from our arrays dropped when some Cu drifted in front of the sun let alone on days when you have 8/8 cloud of thin to moderate thickness.



Coal fired power plants have and availability of between 80-90%
so there is not a great deal of difference.
So i see it as a good thing compared to something that is spewing out tonnes of pollution everyday, and it does not need to be fed tonnes of coal every hour.

Well i have solar power and live in one of the wettest places in Australia, so we get a good deal of "thick cloud" and i can say that i have only used the generator once in the last 12 months to charge batteries.....

Originally Posted By: Bill Illis

No mention of the subsidies in the projects.

What are the government contributions to capital and the on-going operating subsidies.



isn't it amazing how quickly they hop on the subsidies bandwagon grin yet fossil receive a much much higher rate of subsidies (tax payers money) yet they never want to acknowledge that.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 11:43

Report exposes Government hypocrisy on fossil fuel subsidies

The New Zealand government is subsidising the oil and gas industry to the tune of $46 million annually, an investment at odds with its claims on the world stage to be spearheading efforts to reform fossil fuel subsidies, says global conservation …WWF media release – for immediate release

New report exposes Government hypocrisy on fossil fuel subsidies

$46 million for oil & gas at odds with global commitments to reform fossil fuel subsidies

The New Zealand government is subsidising the oil and gas industry to the tune of $46 million annually, an investment at odds with its claims on the world stage to be ‘spearheading’ efforts to reform fossil fuel subsidies, says global conservation organisation WWF.

A new report released today from WWF-New Zealand highlights the contradiction in the government’s rhetoric overseas and their domestic policy which has seen these subsidies more than double since coming to power in 2009.

Peter Hardstaff, WWF-New Zealand climate change campaigner, said: “Climate Change Minister Tim Groser is travelling around the world talking up New Zealand’s leading role in reforming fossil fuels subsidies, while back home Energy Minister Simon Bridges is giving hand outs to the oil and gas industry. This smacks of hypocrisy and further undermines New Zealand’s reputation on climate change, which has already taken a hammering from pulling out of binding global commitments under Kyoto II.”

Financial subsidies that encourage the production and consumption of fossil fuels are increasingly being recognised internationally as a major barrier to global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs: “Production subsidies…inhibit innovation and the development of cleaner technologies, and they reduce incentives to produce and use fossil fuels more efficiently.”

The National-led government has significantly increased its support for oil and gas through indirect subsidies such as taxbreaks and support for exploration data and research – up from $6 million in 2009 to $46 million today. In total, support for consumption and production of fossil fuels has risen from $40.6 million to almost $85 million.

The money freed up from eliminating support for oil and gas extraction would be better spent on more environmentally and socially beneficial initiatives, such as a multi-year programme to install grid-connected solar panels onto the roofs of Housing New Zealand’s 70,000 homes, the report argues.

Peter Hardstaff said: “We question the use of public money to encourage an already wealthy industry to extract fossil fuels leading to more pollution. The government needs to transition away from polluting oil and gas and start investing in a clean energy future for New Zealand, for the benefit of the planet and the health and wellbeing of New Zealanders.”

Science shows that if the planet is to have a good chance of staying below 2 degrees Celsius – the internationally agreed target for limiting global warming – then three quarters of all fossil fuel reserves must remain in the ground.
http://business.scoop.co.nz/2013/06/05/report-exposes-government-hypocrisy-on-fossil-fuel-subsidies/
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 11:46



Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn. announced they would introduce the End Polluter Welfare Act to Congress. The bill would save over $10 billion a year by cutting fossil fuel subsidies - particularly, it would end tax breaks for fossil fuel companies.

The legislation would also put an end to special financing for fossil fuels, end taxpayer-funded research & development, and set "fair royalties policies." Sanders remarked the Act is "the most comprehensive ever introduced on this subject. It ends all tax breaks, special financing arrangements, and the federal research and development funding."

A recently released fact sheet outlined the money that would be saved by getting rid of fossil fuel subsidies:

$14 billion saved by ending the intangible drilling deduction - which the oil industry currently receives, and which typically represents 60 to 80 percent of the total drilling cost.
$12 billion saved by repealing a 2004 law, which allows fossil fuel corporations to claim they are manufacturers, in order to take part in the tax deductions aimed at helping actual U.S. manufacturers.
$6.8 billion saved by closing an existing loophole that lets oil companies like BP deduct money they spend cleaning up their own oil spills and paying subsequent damages.
$2.4 billion saved by stopping fossil fuel outfits from investing through master limited partnerships, an option that is unavailable to green energy businesses, which illustrates the obvious pro-fossil fuel/anti-clean energy favoritism that exists today. (Indeed, fossil fuels are subsidized nearly six times the rate of renewable energy. From 2002-2008, reports 350, the U.S. government gave the fossil fuel industry $72 billion+ in subsidies, while investments in the green energy industry totaled about $12.2 billion.)
$3.7 billion saved by shutting down the Federal Office of Fossil Energy.
$10.6 billion saved by recouping lost royalties for offshore drilling in public waters.
It is also quite clear that the fossil fuel industry does not need subsidies: In 2011, said this report, the five big oil powerhouses (BP, Chevron, Conoco, Shell, Exxon Mobil) enjoyed $137 billion in profits, and furthermore earned a combined $33.5 billion in the first quarter of this year alone.

Moreover, unlike green energy incentives, which periodically expire and require Congress to approve extensions, the fossil fuel industry has many subsidies permanently cemented within the tax code after decades of lobbying (which, in 2011, the oil/gas/coal industries spent a combined $167 million doing).

The End Polluter Welfare Act is important, said 350, not only because it ends these unfair pro-fossil fuel benefits, but would also reduce the federal deficit, give $807 to every U.S. taxpayer, and could even go to purchase 2.8 million Chevy Volts.

Sanders is calling on citizens to help make sure that the End Polluter Welfare Act sees the light of day, which they can do by signing a petition.

"People are sick and tired," said Sanders, "of seeing the same folks who want to cut nutrition programs for hungry children fight tooth and nail to preserve federal tax breaks that go to Exxon Mobil - one of the most profitable corporations in history."

http://www.peoplesworld.org/proposed-bill-would-end-fossil-fuel-subsidies/
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 12:37

"Progressive" California with it's massive loads of regulations red tape and totally impractical regulations and highly discriminatory taxes plus carbon taxes designed to inflict heavy "socially progressive" imposts on any industrial production is experiencing a mass exodus of industry of every type and business into other american states that don't bear the progressive label and are very receptive to new industries and the creation of new jobs.
The comparative and current unemploynment data from the USA tells the story very clearly on how Progressive California is travelling in it's Progressive economic situation


Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 12:53

Oh how ironic... laugh evillaugh

World’s biggest coal company turns to solar – to save energy costs

The world’s largest coal mining company – Coal India – is looking to innovative solution to reduce its own energy bills: it’s installing solar energy.

The company, which is listed but government controlled, and which accounts for more than 80 per cent of coal production in India, is installing a 2MW plant at its Sampalbur coal plant in Odisha. It plans to install solar at its operations across the country, including at its mining research arm, the Central Mine Planning and Design Institut.

Officials told local media DNA that the installation of solar PV at mines and staff housing areas is aimed at reducing Coal India’s own energy bills.

But the most striking aspect of the decision is the company’s own recognition that fossil fuels are depleting, and that solar is approaching grid parity.

“India has an abundance of sunshine and the trend of depletion of fossil fuels is compelling energy planners to examine the feasibility of using renewable sources of energy like solar, wind, and so on,” Coal India’s bid document said.

Another state-owned coal company, Neyvili Corp, as well as Oil India, are also venturing into the solar market, Neyvili is building a 10MW solar PV plant with an option to upgrade to a 25MW facility.

Across India, around 2.3GW of solar is expected to be installed by 2016, with more expected as distributedsolar provides cheaper options that sourcing electricity from the grid.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/worlds-b...rgy-costs-31634
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 15:31

i knew it wouldn't be long until ROM chimed in with some anti Californian post.

SACRAMENTO (KABC) -- California's unemployment rate has sharply dropped to 9 percent for the first time in nearly 4 1/2 years.

The state Employment Development Department announced the new numbers Friday.

The last time California's unemployment rate was below 10 percent occurred in November 2008, nearly a year after the recession began.



You also have the unemployment among Hispanic and African Americans in California which is

* Hispanic = 10.2%
* African American = 12.2%
* White = 5.0%
http://www.calmis.ca.gov/htmlfile/subject/demoaa.htm
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 15:50

Well it seems from those unemployment figures that a considerable racial discrimination is well and truly entrenched in "Progressive California".
Posted by: pogonantha

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 16:58

Originally Posted By: ROM
Well it seems from those unemployment figures that a considerable racial discrimination is well and truly entrenched in "Progressive California".


or maybe bro there just aint no wurk in da hood..
Posted by: Tom1234

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 17:09

Most likely they are not educated, the cycle is hard to break with the gang life that goes on in the LA region. You would have to delve deeper into the census stats and education stats to find the cause of job inequality.

52% of Latino adults have no high school diploma
20% of African Americans have no high school diploma
11% White have no high school diploma
http://www.cpehn.org/demochartdetail.php?btn_viewchart=1&view_20.x=30&view_20.y=9

Sure the discrimination is sad, but it doesn't take away the fact that they have been progressive and still maintain a huge economy.

California GDP = $1.9 trillion (rank 9 in world versus nations)
next closest state Texas $1.2trillion

Australia $924 Billion

Median income of $61,000 versus USA average of $52,000 I'd suggest they aren't doing to bad in California. Apart from housing which is over priced, they have an Australian like property bubble, over $400k median versus USA median of $186k.


http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06000.html


Originally Posted By: pogonantha


or maybe bro there just aint no wurk in da hood..


Not work that they want to put on their tax return lol
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 17:54

When they elect progressives like the aptly named Governor" Moon beam" Brown for a second go around at the state governor ship you know they have real troubles.
California might supposedly be ranked as the ninth largest economy in the world [ I think it was the 6th largest I was told when I was in the USA in 1991 ] but they are effectively bankrupt.

If they were a company they definitely would be bankrupt.

Australia's GDP is around the US$1.5 trillion dollar mark [ IMF ] US$1.37 trillion [ World bank ]

Ref; Wiki/List of countries by GDP (nominal)
Posted by: Max Record

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 19:10

With any employment figures, I'd love to know the percentage changes and values of full time, part time and casual workers...it's all well and good to say the unemployment rate has gone down, but I'll bet that is not because there is more full time work.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 22:07

New record for clean energy in Australia

A record 13.14 per cent of Australia’s electricity was supplied by renewable energy in 2012, according to new figures released today by the Clean Energy Council.

Clean Energy Council chief executive, David Green, said the 2012 Clean Energy Australia Report showed energy efficiency and renewables were having an increasing influence on our power supply.

“The clean energy industry contributed $4.2 billion in investment and approximately 24,300 jobs to the Australian economy in 2012,” Mr Green said.

“The cost of fossil fuels such as gas has been going up, while clean energy has been getting cheaper – fast.

“Earlier this year the millionth solar power system was installed, while last year was a record one for Australia’s wind power businesses, with the country’s 62 wind farms powering the equivalent of more than one million homes for the first time. These milestones clearly show the progress towards cleaner sources of power.”

Clean Energy Council chair and AGL chief executive, Michael Fraser, said there were still challenges ahead, but the clean energy industry was showing significant progress.

“The review of the Renewable Energy Target last year reinforced the bipartisan commitment to the policy by all major parties, and in its current form it is estimated that it will generate another $18.7 billion in investment,” Mr Fraser said.

“We recognise that there are many challenges we will need to meet in the decades to come. But this is a rapidly maturing industry filled with innovative thinkers who are constantly looking for ways to overcome these challenges and do things better.”
http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news/2013/6/5/renewable-energy/new-record-clean-energy-australia
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 05/06/2013 22:28

New hybrid technology set to change the future of renewables

A new hybrid technology that integrates wind and solar power generation is set to overcome many of the problems associated with traditional renewable power systems and revolutionise the green energy sector.
The project has been developed by SME McCamley Middle East Ltd with research input from our Department of Mechanical Engineering.
McCamley's hybrid turbines encase wind turbine blades in an outer frame, which is topped with solar cells. Unlike traditional turbine, the McCamley structure has proven to be bat and bird friendly, with animals being deterred from the blades by the outer frame.
The turbines are specially designed to be mounted on buildings and in built-up areas, helping to facilitate a growth in Urban Renewable Power. They're lightweight so reduce the impact on buildings, and the multi-leg design distributes the load onto the building evenly.
The compact, noise-free design overcomes concerns that many people have about living near traditional wind turbines farms.
While traditional turbines lose the ability to generate power at very high wind speeds, the McCamley turbine operates safely in storm conditions and doesn't need to be shut down. Conversely, when wind speeds are as low as 1.8m/s it can still self-start and therefore needs no power from the grid.
Abulrub, CEO of McCamley Middle East Ltd and a University of Bath alumnus, said: "The success of McCamley's hybrid turbine in meeting customer needs and addressing existing associated problems with traditional turbines is the result of innovation and research by both our team and that at the University of Bath.
"Our resulting turbine addresses many of the concerns that the energy sector and the general public have with other renewable technologies, and we believe that as a company we're set to revolutionise the sector."
Dr Necip Sahinkaya, academic lead at the University, said: "Small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) form a significant share of the UK's economic activities and are being increasingly recognised by the Government as an important vehicle for future growth and economic recovery.
"Through the University of Bath working with SMEs like McCamley we're able to provide a unique environment and leadership. We aim to match our young engineers with innovative companies like this one where the resulting product contributes to the future of our country."


Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-06-hybrid-technology-future-renewables.html#jCp
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 08:31

If it wasn't so sad and so destroying of the low income earner's ability to make ends meet after paying those increasing energy costs created by the wind and solar industries, you would have to laugh at the cut and paste, fluff piece posts to defend the incomes of the big wealthy investors in those grossly inefficient wind and solar farms.

Might dare to question the huge public subsidy rip offs by the wealthy subsidy scammers of the wind and solar industries.

The very left greenpeace and all it's other ramshackle nostrums that are regularly trotted out to save the world from something or another every other day.

The global warmers and the renewable energy believers and pushers.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 09:12

Would it be any different if there were no renewables on the scene? no power would go up, once Utilities are sold off from Government hands the inevitable price rises happen almost instantly (although they always claim that power prices will not rise! smirk ) Power companies are also keen to make good profits and will always bump prices up accordingly, just blaming renewables for every woe in society is just ignorance.

Where do your post's come from ROM? all those "cut and paste" articles that you supply? whistle another poor argument from the sceptic camp.
I post articles as they come online and i post them when i get a chance to,if it overpowers the sceptics then it just goes to show that they do not have to much to add to the debate. smile

Yes it is also sad that poor land owners are getting scammed by
all those wealth mines in the states that are profiting from gas wells on the owners properties while the owner only get excuses why they are not getting any royalties.

i also notice you chose to ignore my previous questions on solar panels....
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 09:16

...
Posted by: Andy Double U

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 09:31

Originally Posted By: @_Yasified_shak
... if it overpowers the sceptics then it just goes to show that they do not have to much to add to the debate. smile


ROFL... It's more likely that the taxes of the sceptics are propping up the believers through social welfare and research grants. In order to pay taxes you need to earn an income, to earn an income you need to work. In fact, I dare say, the sense of self satisfaction to be gained from being a positive contributor to society would easily dwarf one's ability to feel good by belittling the contributions of those poor souls who obviously aren't as enlightened.
Posted by: retired weather man

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 10:11

The debate continues to rage in Qld about the recent latest power price rise with more to come. Already on the news this morning was mentioned a " renewable tax " portion of the bills will increase about $260 p.a. in about 2 years on top of profit driven rises..

As well as the privatization profit factor which has been correctly highlighted above, the Qld Premier is making noises about those generating their own power and thinking of how to even the field a bit.

OK they generate their own during the day, but use the grid at night or on unsuitable days but pay nothing for this use - that we all know.

But they pay nothing for the infrastructure under the current system. If the poles outside their houses fall over, who fixes it - FOR FREE. In each power bill an amount is calculated for infrastructure maintenance/renewal etc. THIS AMOUNT SHOULD BE CHARGED TO ALL including renewable users. A simple and by my way of thinking, quite equitable solution.

I have said the following before and say it again here - I still cannot fathom why a rebate from the Carbon Tax is paid to some big polluters. Is that not negating what the Tax was designed for.

And if the various Govt's are genuine in saving the planet, why is the Carbon Tax not used to provide EVERY household in the country with solar panels, instead of these useless rebates.???
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 10:17

+1 RWM
Just as every council charges you a water fee even if your not connected to a water main so should every house hold have a charge levied against it to cover power infrastructure.
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 10:27

Not what he said actually. He said "OK they generate their own during the day, but use the grid at night or on unsuitable days but pay nothing for this use" - not the same as houses that do not have power connected to them. We work on 100% solar with generator backup. Nearest town power is kms away. Why on earth should we pay a power infrastructure levy?
Posted by: ROM

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 11:44

In a way you are right Bello Boy and I can see your point and I would feel the same but then on the other hand you use public amenities like hospitals and shops and all those other public and private amenities that we all use and which we should all in some way or another contribute support to in maintaining the essential electrical grid system that allows those amenities to exist and be available for all of us to use at our own personal whim.

Those like you with their own power supplies and no grid connections believe they shouldn't and don't expect to contribute to grid maintenance particularly when that grid structure is privately owned and operated and not government owned which in the government owned case can be subsidised with public taxes which the self sufficient private generators also then contribute to through their taxes.

I don't think at all you should be made to pay any full grid maintenance levy if you are not connected but some relatively small contribution might be a way out if you are located within an easy connection distance of the grid and then choose not to be connected much as it might go against the grain of those with their own systems.

It's a dilemma and certainly not black and white at all and there are points to be said for both views.
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 12:05

Quote:
Why on earth should we pay a power infrastructure levy?


I know that that doesn't feel fair... but in the same way: I - living in a Sydney suburb had to pay a Qld infrastructure levy. I haven't used a hospital for decades - and I have top private insurance cover - so why do i have to pay a madicare levy? Why do I have to work for 40% of the day before I can start earning money that i can spend on my family. Are these things fair?

But I do it and don't whinge (too much). Because these are jsut accepted costs of living in a "society"... and yes I accept that my taxes do go to support people who chose to live outside of socitey and not contribute in return. But that is just life...
Posted by: retired weather man

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 12:10

I agree with you Bello Boy and all others " in the bush " well away from the grid. My comments are directed to suburbia who are connected to the grid...
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 12:28

Originally Posted By: ROM
In a way you are right Bello Boy and I can see your point and I would feel the same but then on the other hand you use public amenities like hospitals and shops and all those other public and private amenities that we all use and which we should all in some way or another contribute support to in maintaining the essential electrical grid system that allows those amenities to exist and be available for all of us to use at our own personal whim.

Would suggest that I do pay - through my taxes (for public amenities) and when paying for goods in store, so I do contribute. We have a shop that pays over $1000 per month for power - and where does that money come from? The customers.
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 12:29

Originally Posted By: retired weather man
I agree with you Bello Boy and all others " in the bush " well away from the grid. My comments are directed to suburbia who are connected to the grid...

And totally agree with you on that one - does not seem fair if that is the case at the moment.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 12:58

Everyone (especially in Qld) pays a fixed tariff regardless of the energy they use, so what is that for? bumping up the companies bottom line?

No, it is a maintenance charge and they are always happy to tell you it goes towards paying for maintenance and upgrades of power lines and infrastructure.

So why should people have to pay a basic levy twice?? a fee/levy tariff they are all the same thing.....
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 13:08

Mongolia Opens $122 Million Wind Farm With Aim to Cut Pollution

Mongolia is scheduled to start operations at its first wind farm this month, a $122 million project that’s the biggest power plant in 30 years and part of a government effort to cap pollution cloaking the capital city.

The 50-megawatt facility developed by Clean Energy LLC using 31 turbines from General Electric Co. (GE) is located on a wind-raked ridge about 45 miles (72 kilometers) southwest of Ulaanbaatar. Sengee Enkh-Amgalan, the company’s chief executive officer, plans to officially start the plant on June 20.

Mongolia is seeking alternatives to fossil fuels such as coal that power its industry and mines. The government has set a target to get 20 percent to 25 percent of its energy from renewables by 2020, up from less than 2 percent currently. Coal supplies about 80 percent of the nation’s energy.

“In order to meet the 20 percent goal, the government really has to support these kinds of enterprises,” said Enkh-Amgalan, adding that he expects the government will subsidize the costs of wind power in order to make it affordable.

Smog from burning coal has choked the capital in recent months, causing the World Health Organization to name Ulaanbaatar the second-worst city for air quality behind Ahvaz in western Iran. Residents use coal to heat homes when winter temperatures plunge to minus 30 Fahrenheit.

Clean Energy says the wind park will save 122,000 tons of coal, 1.6 million tons of water and will eliminate 180,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

Purchase Agreements
Clean Energy’s parent company, Newcom Group, established Mongolia’s first mobile phone operator, Mobicom, and helped revive the nation’s airline industry by establishing Eznis Airways, according to its website.

The government agreed to a power purchase agreement with Clean Energy, which will receive 9.5 cents a kilowatt-hour for power from the wind for the lifetime of the project. The company expects to recoup its investment in 14 years.

Enkh-Amgalan says the power station can produce 140 million to 160 million kilowatt-hours per year, which gives the plant revenue of $15 million per year.

“We expect that by the end of next year tariff prices will be liberalized,” said Enkh-Amgalan, a graduate of California’s Monterrey Institute of International Studies. “We’re not sure how it will be, but there is a certain commitment from the government that the tariffs will increase. This process is happening but slowly.”

Turbines at the plant will last about 20 years, said Enkh-Amgalan, after which time the current 1.6-megawatt turbines may need to be replaced. By then, he expects turbines may generate as much as 7 megawatts each, which would triple the output.

Roads, Grid
The biggest challenge so far has been dealing with Mongolia’s lack of infrastructure. A similar project in China would cost 30 percent less said Enkh-Amgalan, due to the vast distances and lack of roads in Mongolia, where most highways are little more than vague jeep tracks across the desert.

Clean Energy Asia and Tokyo-based SoftBank Corp. (9984) have 200,000 hectares of land in the Gobi Desert and plan to construct a wind park with a capacity of 200 megawatts to 300 megawatts, said Enkh-Amgalan.

Mining companies and towns in the region could draw power from the facilities, or the energy could be exported on an “Asia Super Grid” developers are sketching as a way to share power from Japan to India, he said.

Wind speeds in Salkhit average 8.2 meters per second, while Gobi Desert speeds exceed 9 meters per second. The Gobi has the potential to yield 11 gigawatts per year of solar energy and 300,000 megawatts of wind power, Enkh-Amgalan said.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-06...o-cut-pollution
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 13:50

Originally Posted By: YS, re Mongolia wind farm
Clean Energy says the wind park will save 122,000 tons of coal, 1.6 million tons of water and will eliminate 180,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year.

And just how are these proposed turbines going to be manufactured without producing/using all of the above?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 14:10

Goldman Sachs fund invests $135 million in India's ReNew Power

MUMBAI: Goldman Sachs has invested additional $135 million in ReNew Power, raising its total investment in the company to $385 million and making it the biggest private equity investment in India's renewable energy sector.

ReNew Power, which was founded by Sumant Sinha who was earlier the chief operating officer of wind turbine major Suzlon Energy, has 200 mw of wind turbines in operation. It aims to scale up its capacity to 500 mw by end-2014 and 1,000 mw to 2015.

Confirming the development, Sinha said, "Goldman Sachs has long-term interest in renewable energy sector and has therefore invested another $135 million. With this investment, we have enough equity base to set up 1,200- 1,300 mw of capacity." In 2011, Goldman Sachs invested $200 million to acquire majority stake in ReNew Power. It later invested another $50 million.

Sector experts said that ReNew Power has been in talks with other wind energy generators for acquisition of assets and the funds from Goldman Sachs may be used towards that. "We are looking at acquisition opportunities. We have the capital and we want to expand, it doesn't matter whether its organically or through the secondary market route," Sinha said.

The renewable energy sector, led by wind energy, in India is seeing a rebound in investment with around six deals worth $650 million (including this deal) being sealed so far in 2013. In contrast, investors have been shying away from the conventional energy segment due to policy uncertainties, delay in projects and lack of fuel linkage. The wind energy sector has had its own share of uncertainties, with the government rolling back sops such as generation-based incentives (GBI) and accelerated depreciation (AD) in April 2012. GBI , which gives independent power producers monetary benefit on every unit generated, was reintroduced in the Union Budget this year but it is yet to be implemented. Renewable energy projects have also been hit by the near collapse of the Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) market.

"Its been pretty tough for the sector due to the uncertainty around GBI and the collapse of the REC market. Valuation of projects are now different from what they used to be," Sinha said. India plans to double its renewable energy capacity to 55,000 MW by 2017.


http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news...ow/20440696.cms
Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 14:34


Reminds me of all the ethanol announcements in the US 5 years ago.

Subsidized alcohol production, forced on the people through ethanol-gasoline-blending mandate.

THEN WE FIND OUT, ethanol is actually harmful for the environment and it just drives up the cost of food (all foods as a side-effect of raising corn prices).

-----

Wind=solar=ethanol
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 06/06/2013 21:41

Scotland’s tallest ever wind turbine gets the go-ahead for deployment

The 640 ft prototype 7MW wind turbine will be built by Samsung and used as a demonstration test-bed for cutting-edge wind technology

Scottish Energy Minister Fergus Ewing has given the green light for the deployment of Scotland’s tallest ever wind turbine to be constructed by the Korean company Samsung. The offshore demonstration wind turbine will have an installed capacity of 7MW and be deployed off the Scottish coastline at the Fife Energy Park in Methil where the Scottish government has allocated 134 acres of land for renewable energy development.

The 640 ft high test-bed turbine will test new designs and models for offshore wind turbines in order to increase their reliability and efficiency.

Scottish Finance Secretary John Swinney said: “Today’s announcement marks a significant step forward in establishing a globally competitive supply chain for the offshore wind industry. This development, which is being undertaken by Samsung Heavy Industries with more than £6 million support from Scottish Enterprise, will utilise newly developed technologies which have not yet been deployed offshore – further confirming Scotland’s commitment to innovation in the offshore wind production sector.”

The deployment was also praised by local authories including Fife Council which described the planned energy park as one of the leading centres for the global offshore wind industry. The project received the approval of WWF Scotland whose director, Lang Banks, commented that if Scotland is to make new jobs in renewable energy a reality it is important that the country “has the facilities to test offshore wind turbines and other components

http://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/a...lean-20130515-1
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/06/2013 11:34

Colorado gov signs bill doubling solar, wind energy demands

Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper officially put the contentious 2013 lawmaking session to rest Wednesday by signing the remainder of the bills passed by the Democratic-controlled state legislature, including one that many rural lawmakers hoped he would veto.

That measure, Senate Bill 252, doubles to 20 the percentage of renewable energy that rural electricity cooperatives are required to provide by 2020 — a standard many believe will raise electricity rates in mountains and plains communities.

“Hold onto your wallets, rural Colorado,” House Minority Leader Rep. Mark Waller said in a statement after the bill was signed. “Senate Bill 252 will cost the average farm family thousands of dollars in higher energy costs and force rural electric associations to pay billions of dollars to comply with the Democrats’ new energy mandate.”

Opponents campaigned hard for a veto — including through the unusual step of buying TV airtime for commercials encouraging him to reject the proposal.

But in the end, Hickenlooper said investing in renewable energy sources like wind, solar, coal mine methane and synthetic gas produced from municipal waste (through “waste-to-energy” technology) would boost the economy and create jobs in rural areas.

“Each waste-to-energy facility creates an estimated $54 million in economic activity and most of the proposed facilities have been targeted toward rural communities,” he wrote in a signing statement explaining his support of the bill. “Also as a newly eligible resource, waste-to-energy projects create profitable outlets for the more than 70 million waste tires stockpiled in the rural areas around Colorado.”

“Additionally, this legislation includes coal mine methane as an ‘eligible energy resource’ which will allow Colorado to more safely develop coal gas production in rural communities,” he wrote. “Again, these are mostly rural projects and rural jobs.”

Republican lawmakers have said that achieving the new 20 percent renewable requirement is impossible without raising rates, although the bill caps any increase at 2 percent, computed annually.


Hickenlooper said he would have vetoed the bill if it didn’t contain that provision.

“I don’t care what he does,” Republican Sen. Larry Crowder told Denver’s Fox 31, “it’s going to raise rates for people in rural parts of the state.”

Overall, Hickenlooper signed 60 bills on Wednesday. Among them were a bill creating a special drivers license for illegal immigrants, a bill requiring law enforcement agencies to test all rape kits, a bill allowing prosecutors to file extra charges in crimes where a woman loses her pregnancy (such as in a drunk driving or assault cases), and a bill making it easier for firefighters to unionize.

By signing the renewable energy bill into law, Hickenlooper accomplished what he said was a goal of not having to veto any bills this year.

At least one Republican lawmaker wasn’t impressed.

“There are some bills out there he should have vetoed, because that would have been good governance for the people about Colorado,” House Minority Leader Mark Waller told Fox31.

“It’s not about being able to tout a score of no vetoes, it’s about doing what’s right for this state.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/06/06/colora.../#ixzz2VURgtppF
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 07/06/2013 11:46

PGE beats rest of utilities for green power sales

Portland-based utilities — and their customers — continue to lead the pack in choosing renewable energy options for their electricity.

For the first time ever, Portland General Electric registered the nation’s highest sales of renewable energy in 2012 as well as the highest number of customers choosing a green power option, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

PGE had been second to Austin Energy of Austin, Texas in total sales of renewable energy in the prior period, but surpassed it in 2012, the federal laboratory reported.

PacifiCorp, also based in Portland, wasn’t far behind PGE. PacifiCorp, which operates under the Pacific Power name here, ranked third nationally in total sales of renewable energy, and second after PGE in total number of customers choosing a green power option.

PGE has 87,987 customers choosing to pay premium prices to get green power for their electricity, and they bought 834,125 megawatt-hours of power last year. PacifiCorp was close behind with 87,919 customers, and they purchased 604,007 megawatt-hours. Pacific Power tends to operate more in rural parts of the state, while PGE is dominant in the Portland area.

Customers who buy green power options don’t necessarily get electricity generated by solar, wind, geothermal or hydro via the wires serving their homes. But by buying that amount of green power, it commits the utilities to provide that amount through their own production or via purchases on the open market.

The more solar and wind power customers agree to buy, the more PGE and PacifiCorp know they have a market to provide, with a higher price to make it pencil out.

The city of Palo Alto had the highest customer participation rate in green power options, with 18.2 percent of its customers signing up in 2012. PGE ranked second in that category, with 12.4 percent, and Pacific Power ranked sixth, with 7.6 percent of its customers.

The Northwest Renewable Energy Laboratory, part of the U.S. Department of Energy, is based in and around Golden, Colo.

http://portlandtribune.com/sl/154167-pge-beats-rest-of-utilities-for-green-power-sales
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 08/06/2013 11:22

One a bit closer to home.....

Cairns energy costs could be lowered the natural way
SUGAR cane, wind and sunshine - it sounds more like a weekend away but experts reckons these natural resources could pull the Far North out of an electricity crisis.
It has been one week since news broke that electricity prices will soar, with some bills set to increase by more than 20 per cent in the new financial year.
Some families told The Cairns Post they were bracing for massive bills because they had already cut back on their electricity use as much as possible, while others hoped for a new electricity retailer in the region to compete with Ergon Energy.
But experts say the Far North should take advantage of the region's natural surrounds to harness renewable energy and ultimately cut back on spending.
Cairns' Evolve Energy prepared the Tropical North Queensland Renewable Energy Industry Development Plan for the State Government last year, which detailed strategies to ramp up renewable energy use in the region.
Evolve Energy director David Smyth said increasing renewable energy such as biomass would benefit the Far North in many ways but it would rely on community and Government support.
"We think there is definitely an opportunity for different renewable energy to reduce electricity prices," he said.
"Iceland uses 100 per cent renewable energy for electricity production using a geothermal resource (hot springs) but the key renewable energy resources in this region are wind, solar and biomass. Gas from sugar cane is being used to generate electricity at the sugar mills for extra revenue. They use the waste product from sugar cane to burn in their boiler and it's a carbon neutral renewable energy resource.
"There should be more of it. The problem with Queensland is the existing electricity utilities are Government-owned corporations so they are not in favour of people producing their own energy."
James Cook University associate professor in power engineering Ahmad Zahedi said it would be viable for consumers to install their own solar systems at home but the current electricity network could not support a large-scale farm.
"The state of Queensland must be number one in turning sun energy into electricity and with the price drop of solar panels, which is one-fifth compared to ten years back, it makes sense to generate your own electricity," he said.
"The problem in Queensland is if you build a wind or solar farm, the electricity network is not able to absorb the power. The network is weak and upgrading it would cost billions of dollars."
Professor Zahedi said he thought installing a wind-farm would be more effective toward the Cape instead of on the Tablelands.
"I have visited a wind farm on the Tablelands but if you want to make it economical you need to move a little bit further up, you would find a windier site toward the Cape," he said.
More than 700 people currently work in the renewable energy industry in this region.
pi1154enThe Tropical North Queensland Renewable Energy Industry Development Plan developed strategies to see 2500 people employed in the industry by 2020.
Quick facts
-About 5800 residents in the Cairns region have solar at home.
-People with solar receive either a 44c or 8c per kilowatt hour rebate from the Government, depending on when they applied for installation.
-The Barron Gorge hydroelectric power station saves about 260,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas per year, the equivalent of 660,000 light bulbs.
-A wind farm is proposed at Mt Emerald.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/06/2013 10:22

Urgent plea to build wind farm factories

Europe’s expanding offshore generation business will go elsewhere taking investment with it, industry body RenewableUK said.

Potential for tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs hangs in the balance
RenewableUK’s chief Maria McCaffery
The Government plans wind farms to supply up to 18 gigawatts of power by 2020, up from 3.3 gigawatts, with the rest of Europe set to match it.

Europe needs 64 large factories to make the towers and turbines but only a third of that number are built. Of the 20-or-so being planned less than a quarter are in Britain.

RenewableUK’s chief Maria McCaffery said it was a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to build large-scale offshore wind farm supply factories.

She added: “Potential for tens of thousands of manufacturing jobs hangs in the balance.”

Energy minister Michael Fallon said: “Offshore wind is a British success story.”

http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/406834/Urgent-plea-to-build-wind-farm-factories
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/06/2013 10:26

Vestas wins 94 MW wind power order in South Africa

Vestas announced it has secured a firm and unconditional wind turbine order for the West Coast One wind energy project from Aurora Wind Power, a joint venture between GDF SUEZ, Investec and Kagiso Investment. The new wind power plant will consist of 47 V90-2.0 MW turbines, to be installed at the Western Cape of South Africa. The start of the turbine delivery is planned for the third quarter of 2014 and the wind power plant is expected to be commissioned by May 2015.

“We are happy to announce this large order for South Africa and to construct our first wind power project together with Aurora Wind Power – all the more so in connection with a project company jointly owned by GDF SUEZ, already a long-term and highly valued Vestas customer. With our 30 years of experience and efficient wind energy solutions we contribute to our partners’ business case and support their vision of a sustainable wind energy market in South Africa,” says Vestas Central Europe President, Thomas Richterich.
“Vestas Southern Africa is proud to be chosen as the EPC contractor for one of the largest wind power plants in South Africa. This confirms Vestas’ market leading position in South Africa where Vestas has won 36 per cent of the megawatts in the first two auctions. We look forward to building on this success and further developing, together with our long-standing and global partner GDF SUEZ, exciting wind opportunities in the country,” states Phylip Leferink, Country Manager/VP Sales, Vestas Southern Africa.
The contract includes supply, installation and commissioning of 47 V90-2.0 MW wind turbines, along with a VestasOnline® Business SCADA solution, full scope civil and electrical works as well as a 15-year full-scope service agreement (AOM 5000). The AOM 5000 service package offers customers assured performance, helping them to avoid unforeseen operational costs.

http://www.pennenergy.com/articles/penne...uth-africa.html
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 12/06/2013 10:35

The US added 723 megawatts of solar power during the first 3 months of 2013



48% of all new electricity capacity added
During the first quarter of 2013, the U.S. has added 723 megawatts (MW) of new solar capacity to its power grid, a 33% growth rate year-on-year. This accounted for over 48% of all new electric capacity installed during that period. According to the SEIA: "Overall, these installations represent the best first quarter of any given year for the industry. In addition, the residential and utility market segments registered first-quarter highs with 164 MW and 318 MW respectively." The residential segment had particularly impressive growth, with a 53% increase year-on-year!
The chart below shows how each segment fared and how it compares to past quarters:



Notice the huge spike for utility solar at the end of 2012; this timing was caused by government incentives.

With the Q1 numbers, cumulative operating photovoltaic capacity in the U.S. now stands at 7.9 GW, and if you add back concentrating solar thermal and other non-PV sources, the total stands around 8.5 GW.

The U.S. is expected to add 5.3 GW of solar electric capacity in 2013, enough to power more than 960,000 average American homes. The average residential PV system price fell below $5.00 per watt, while the average non-residential system price fell below $4.00 per watt.

Cleaning up the power grid is one of the essential, sine qua non, things that we must do to create a sustainable future. No way around it, we need lots of power that comes from sources that don't run a chemical experiment with our atmosphere by pumping billions of tons of CO2 into and spew various pollutants (mercury, NOx, PM, etc). That's why it's important to keep an eye on the growth of renewable energy and support policies that can increase the speed of the transition (a carbon tax would work wonders, for example, even if it was revenue neutral and other taxes were cut by the same amount).
http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-ener...onths-2013.html
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/06/2013 08:43

Copper Ink Could Cut The Cost Of Solar Panels

Intrinsiq Materials Inc. has been awarded USD $887,000 to further develop a copper ink for use in solar cells.

Most crystalline silicon solar cells use silver paste; which acts as a collection and transportation channel for energy collected by a solar cell. According to the Silver Institute, over 2,800 tonnes of silver are projected for use by the solar panel industry in 2015.

Copper ink costs around 60% less than silver paste and while it has been used in circuit boards and other applications for a few years; it requires baking at high temperatures so that it will conduct electricity. This is an energy intensive process that can also damage the cell or the substrate.

Intrinsiq Materials has developed a copper ink incorporating nano and micro copper particles that can be applied at low temperature, will maintain high conductivity and will not oxidise.

As the process requires only the printing equipment and curing, power usage in production of the ink can drop by 50% or more. Chemical and material usage and waste is reduced by 70%.

The funding provided by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) will allow Rochester based Intrinsiq Materials to boost R&D of the ink, with view to commercialisation soon. The company expects to increase staffing levels from eight employees to up to 25 as a result of project.

"With the support of NYSERDA and all of the capabilities of the Rochester area, the potential to leverage the technology into critical and fast-growing applications such as solar cells has become extremely realizable," said Robert Cournoyer, President and CEO, Intrinsiq Materials.

Under the funding agreement, Intrinsiq will repay NYSERDA if the product is successful and has also matched the funding amount, with assistance from private investors.

NYSERDA’s Advanced Clean Power Technologies program promotes companies researching new forms of clean-energy technologies or projects that can support these technologies.

http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3788
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/06/2013 11:46

NSW council commits to 100% renewable energy by 2025

13 June 2013

The council of the inner-west Sydney city of Leichhardt has committed to becoming 100 per cent renewable by 2025, building on its recent draft plan to tackle climate change by reducing emissions in local government facilities.

Leichhardt, which last year became the second council in NSW to achieve carbon neutrality, made the commitment last week – a goal it plans to achieve through direct investment in renewable energy, and without the need to purchase offsets.

Leichhardt is also one of eight Sydney councils – including Marrickville, Ashfield, Canterbury, Kogarah, Rockdale, Bankstown and Canada Bay – working with the Institute for Sustainable Futures to develop a renewable energy master plan for the region.

The master plan aims to identify the best ways to replace fossil fuels with renewable energy sources, including solar PV, solar thermal, waste-to-energy, mini hydro, wind power and co/trigeneration. There is also the potential for alignment with the City of Sydney’s renewable energy plan.

As part of its own plan, Leichhardt aims to install a large amount of solar across council facilities, including the Town Hall and Balmain Library. A cogeneration plant is being constructed at Leichhardt Park Aquatic Centre – the Council’s largest consumer of electricity. The plan also proposes retrofitting existing energy sources in facilities to be environmentally friendly.

Development of the city’s renewable energy plan is largely credited to the Greens councillors, who are said to have worked hard to gain the support of their Labor, Independent and Liberal counterparts.

(Leichhardt Mayor Darcy Byrne – who is from the ALP – said in February he was “committed to maintaining carbon neutrality,” and that it was “an unanimous position of Council across all political parties to take serious action to address carbon emissions.”)

“Under the Greens’ leadership, Leichhardt has become only the second council in NSW to be carbon neutral,” said Greens Councillor and chair of the Environment Committee, Daniel Kogoy.

“We have increased solar PV installations eight-fold, rolled out Sydney’s first active LED lighting project at Johnstons Creek, established the annual Footprints Ecofestival, and are taking the lead on a seven-council and community-owned inner Sydney renewable energy masterplan. The masterplan will map Leichhardt Council’s progression to 100 per cent renewable energy.”

Kogoy says the plan to shift to 100% renewables will also produce significant local economic benefits, creating new investment opportunities, new jobs and a safe climate.



- See more at: http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/city-of-...h.ZarraB3J.dpuf
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/06/2013 12:23

California leads U.S. in record first quarter for solar installation

The U.S. had a record quarter in solar installation during the first three months of the year, installing 723 megawatts of photovoltaic capacity for a 33% increase over the same period last year. That represents nearly half of all new generation capacity installed in the U.S. during the first quarter of this year, and puts the solar industry on pace for its best year to date.

GTM Research and the Solar Energy Industries Assn. surveyed roughly 200 utilities, state agencies, installers and manufacturers across 28 states for their quarterly U.S. Solar Market Insight, which ranked California first above New Jersey and Hawaii in photovoltaic installation. National totals in the report include all 50 states, as well as Puerto Rico.

California contributed 408 installations of solar-to-electricity power in the first quarter of 2013, the bulk of which came in the utility market segment, though residential installation continued a steady if incremental increase. This is somewhat surprising given a growing trend of installers forgoing the state’s solar initiative rebate.

According to the report’s executive summary, installers reported finding that once they had incorporated the 30% federal incentive tax credit, their systems achieved “retail rate parity.” As a result, many elected to avoid the tedious state-level application process, which according to the report, “demonstrates the impact that soft costs can have on [photovoltaic] project economics.”

California was among the states that benefited from a drop in installation prices, which hovers somewhere around $4 per watt for residential projects nationally. On average, home installation prices fell 15.8% between the first quarters of 2012 and 2013, though not all states or projects saw that level of easing. The report pointed out system prices for residences could range anywhere from less than $3 to nearly $7 per watt.

SEIA and GTM researchers predict the remaining months of 2013 will round out a banner year, with roughly 4,400 megawatts installed in residential, commercial and utility markets. That’s an especially hopeful forecast for the Golden State considering Southern California Edison’s announcement this month that it would permanently close San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

In an interview with The Times on Wednesday, SEIA Chief Executive Rhone Resch said the solar industry would step up to help fill the void left by the nuclear giant. “Obviously California has been a leader for solar energy for some time, but now we’re seeing gigawatts installed on an annual basis,” Resch said. “It is absolutely conceivable that solar will be installed on pace to replace San Onofre.

Resch acknowledged the downward trend in installation price made for a more competitive environment for solar manufacturers.

“The sad truth is a lot of manufacturers will go out of business,” Resch said, “but it is a development that will make the industry stronger. It improves efficiency, and in the long run, California manufacturers will thrive.”

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-california-first-quarter-solar-20130612,0,7386012.story
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/06/2013 12:27

Solar panels at airport get installed

Indy International Airport to get 44,000 panels

Updated: Wednesday, 12 Jun 2013, 5:39 PM EDT
Published : Wednesday, 12 Jun 2013, 4:56 PM EDT

David Barras
INDIANAPOLIS (WISH) - Demolition and a different kind of farm are changing the landscape at the Indianapolis International Airport.

The old terminal is disappearing as crews take down the buildings that you used for air travel until 2008. And on land that once grew hay, you'll see a different kind of crop emerging.

Solar panels are the newest crop rising on 75 acres at the end of a runway near the cell phone lot at Indianapolis International Airport. Right now, 28,000 of the panels are in place. When fully grown, there will be 44,000 panels.

"We're actually a month and a half ahead of schedule which is neat. And you'll see at the end of June first of July, we'll have it completely massed with all the solar panels," says Kurt Schneider, Vice President of Johnson Melloh Solutions, the company building the farm.

"It will be a 10 megawatt AC solar farm that will produce enough energy for 1,200 homes," says Schneider.

Because the FAA puts severe height restrictions on the land, solar panels are a perfect cash crop for the airport.

"It's very similar to the way you would structure a lease. Although it's more money than we would get if we were farming the land or something similar," says Mike Huber who is in charge of all non-airline revenue at the airport.

Income is the reason the airport authority is tearing down the old terminal. In little more than a month, much of the old buildings are gone,

"Concourses C and D are down. And they are working on the rest of the consourses and the administration building," says Huber.

The hope is an aviation transportation or technology company will buy the land, adding more income to the airport coffers.

"We're in a time of sustained drop in emplanements. People just aren't flying as much. And every airport, we're not alone is forced to get creative with the assets that it owns," says Huber.

The airport owns 7,000 acres of land. Land that needs to generate as much income as possible. Along with the two projects, a second solar farm will put be built when the first one is finished.

There's also a gas station and service plaza under construction near the solar farm. All of which will generate more income for the airport.

It's the new reality for city's with airports like Indianapolis International. They must survive in an environment with fewer airlines, bringing fewer passengers to the airport.

http://www.wishtv.com/dpp/news/local/marion_county/solar-panels-at-airport-get-installed
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 13/06/2013 14:53

Japan emerges as solar beacon

apan had some optimistic economic news last week showing that the country's GDP expanded by 0.9 per cent last quarter – its quickest pace in a year.
The data suggest that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's aggressive stimulus measures may be working. They certainly seem to be working to improve this reputation: investors are more confident in a Japanese leader than any time since September 2010, according to a poll of investors, analysts and traders who are Bloomberg subscribers.
Optimism about Abe's policies exceed that for counterparts in the US, Europe and China. Abe took office last December after winning an election on a platform of reflation.

But what does this mean for clean energy? The country's generous solar feed-in tariff continues to bolster demand: Japan Asia Group's plans are moving ahead to develop 500 megawatts of solar projects over the next three years,


Tetsuo Yamashita, chairman of the company, said at a meeting with analysts on 16 May. It has 24 solar plants already developed in Europe, but may trim its business in that region, Yamashita said. Japan Asia received a 1.6 billion yen loan for five solar projects in its home country from Shinsei Bank and Mitsubishi UFJ Lease & Finance Company, it said in a statement in March.

The preceding day, Eurus Energy Holdings announced plans to build a 115MW solar power station in northern Japan. The aim is to start construction of the 49 billion yen ($US480 billion) project this July and to begin running the station in November 2015. Eurus is a venture between Toyota Tsusho Corporation and Tokyo Electric Power Company (Tepco).
And on 14 May, Nippon Paper Industries said that its joint venture with Mitsubishi will begin construction on a 21MW solar power station in western Japan this autumn. The plant is expected to start selling electricity to Shikoku Electric Power in H2 2014.

Demand for solar power is increasing for non-residential projects, according to data released by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry on 17 May. Approved applications for non-residential solar projects jumped to 11GW by the end of February from just under 6GW at the end of January.

The start of the feed-in tariff last year helped Sharp to reduce losses at its solar unit in the Asian country: global solar sales climbed 16 per cent to 260 billion yen ($US2.54 billion) last fiscal year, mainly driven by an increase in residential demand in Japan, the company said. Sharp's operating losses fell to 4.4 billion yen ($US43 billion) for the 12 months ended 31 March compared with 21.9 billion yen ($US210 billion) the previous year.

The continued strong demand in Japan and the depreciation of the yen mean that Sharp could have a good 2013. It may want to differentiate its products from competitors – whether on price or quality – as most other major Japanese manufacturers have begun doing.

In any case, Japan is forecast to install 6-9.4GW of solar capacity this year under its feed-in tariff, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance. This could make it the second-largest – or even the top – solar market in 2013.
Nuclear doubts

Meanwhile Japan's new nuclear regulator looks set to shut down at least one plant and maybe more, after a report published 16 May found that an earthquake fault under the country's oldest reactor at Japan Atomic's Tsuruga plant was active. National law bans building reactors on active faults.

"Japan Atomic's survival is now in doubt," Takashi Aoki at Mizuho Asset Management told Bloomberg News. This also raises the risk for the five other power stations under investigation for active faults. Japan Atomic has repeatedly said that the fault is not active, according to a company statement.

The new Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) also said last week it would issue an order to keep a separate unit, the Monju experimental fast breeder reactor, closed until its operator overhauled safety measures.

The verdict might be a blow for Abe's efforts to get the nuclear capacity back online but it could be reassuring news for the Japanese public that the new watchdog does not seem to shy away from making unwelcome decisions to prioritise safety. The NRA's predecessor reportedly ignored warnings before March 2011 when the earthquake and tsunami caused the meltdown of three reactors in Fukushima.

Only two of Japan's 50 commercial reactors are online. As a result, power companies face losses as they have had to resort to expensive fossil-fuel imports. These have pushed up carbon emissions and energy costs, which manufacturers have said will hurt business. In 2012, the country posted a record high trade deficit of 6.93 trillion yen, the lion's share of which came from the increased cost of imported fuels.

Members of Abe's party gathered on 14 May to demand restart of the nuclear reactors for the sake of the economic recovery. However, their demands may not be in line with public sentiment: in March, thousands of protesters marched through Tokyo, calling on the government to reject nuclear power.

The NRA is not expected to compile new safety standards until after July 2013, meaning that any decision on resuming operations could likely only be made after the upper house elections this summer.
Earlier this week, Tepco said it has not yet decided if it will ask to restart its idled reactors in July, even as its shares surged 11 per cent on a report that it will make an application.
It is assessing whether its Kashiwazaki-Kariwa plant meets new nuclear safety rules, according to a statement to the Tokyo Stock Exchange on 20 May. Two other utilities – Shikoku Electric Power Company and Kyushu Electric Power Company – confirmed that they will apply. An article in the Yomiuri newspaper reported on 19 May that five power companies, including Tepco, would submit restart requests.


Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-ec...l#ixzz2W4KhYMpZ
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/06/2013 10:56

Developing nations see jump in clean energy investment, report says
Renewable energy investments are heading toward developing countries that want to transition from pricey fossil fuels, a report said.

China led the way with $67 billion spent on solar, wind and other clean energy projects, more than half of the total $112 million spent in 2012 among emerging nations, according to Bloomberg, citing the United Nations. That's rapidly catching up with the $132 billion shelled out last year by developed nations such as the United States and Britain.

And of the 138 countries that have set renewable energy goals, one-third are developing nations, the report said. The gap between spending on clean energy between developing and developed nations has narrowed to 18% in 2012, a dramatic decline from the 250% seen in 2007.



The biggest jump in investing regionally came from Africa and the Middle East. Clean energy spending zoomed 228% to $12 billion last year. Spending in some developed countries such as Germany and the U.S. fell more than 30%.

Achim Steiner, executive director of the U.N. Environment Program, told Bloomberg that countries are making the connection between renewable energy and "a future of energy access and security" away from fossil fuels

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-renewable-energy-20130613,0,484138.story
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/06/2013 11:03

Goldman eyes $3b in Japan renewable investments
Goldman Sachs, the New York-based bank planning as much as 300 billion yen ($3 billion) in renewable energy investments in Japan, is eyeing offshore wind power after building up holdings in more established clean energy sources such as solar.
Japan Renewable Energy Co. was set up by Goldman in August after Japan began offering above-market rates to producers of clean energy. The incentives, or feed-in tariffs, have spurred investments in renewables, setting Japan on course this year to become one of the world's largest solar markets by annual installations.
The company sees offshore wind as promising, Shigeru Yasu, a representative director at Japan Renewable Energy, said in an interview in Tokyo yesterday. Geothermal and biomass power also hold potential, he said.
“It takes three to four years to do an environmental impact study for an onshore wind project with more than 10 megawatts of capacity,” Yasu said. “Projects with larger capacity are more attractive because an environmental study requires the same amount of time even for a 500-megawatt offshore farm.”


Five-year investment
Japan Renewable Energy plans in the next five years to invest as much as 50 billion yen directly into clean energy projects with capital provided by GS Infrastructure Partners. It will take as much as 250 billion yen of loans for project financing, Takahisa Nakagawa, also a representative director at Japan Renewable Energy, said in the interview. The investments and loans will amount to about 1,000 megawatts of clean energy, he said.
Wind power is more challenging than solar for a developer because it requires prior investment such as an environmental impact study, Nakagawa said, adding that his company has the advantage of having people with expertise in wind power.
Japan's offshore wind market -- 31 megawatts in cumulative capacity -- lags behind countries like the U.K. and Denmark with 3,093 megawatts and 923 megawatts of capacity, respectively, according to 2012 data compiled by Bloomberg.
Offshore wind typically requires approval from local fishermen before projects can move ahead and costs more for installation and maintenance than onshore wind.
Japan Renewable Energy is considering more than 300 megawatts worth of solar projects, Nakagawa said. The company will use panels by LS Industrial Systems Co., a South Korean electric and industrial equipment maker, at least for its first four plants.
Panel supplier
LSIS was picked because it offers quality products for less compared with Japanese makers and because panels aren't the only product the company produces, the officials said.
“There are big pureplay solar panel companies that went bankrupt and that's worrisome,” Yasu said. “Even though a company offers 20 years of warranty, it's no good if the company won't be around 20 years later.”
Japan is set to overtake Germany as the world's largest solar market, Bloomberg New Energy Finance said last month.
Developers may install 6.9 gigawatts to 9.4 gigawatts of solar in Japan in 2013, the London-based research agency said. Germany led solar installations in 2012 with 7.6 gigawatts of capacity. Cumulative global solar energy installations reached 102 gigawatts for the first time in 2012, according to preliminary BNEF data.


Read more: http://www.watoday.com.au/business/carbo...l#ixzz2W9FWc7Ch
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/06/2013 12:02

Let’s build a sustainable economy

Business leaders will be among the voices in Albany on June 17 urging Gov. Andrew Cuomo to ban fracking and embrace a renewable energy future.

More and more businesses are realizing that the time has come to engage in the statewide and national debate about energy policy and are speaking out against the continuation of fossil fuel extraction. Companies, business organizations and business leaders are helping lead the transition to renewable energy and clean technologies across the country, with New York embodying the potential to become a national leader in this movement.

Why are businesses against extractive processes like fracking for shale gas? Why are businesses mobilizing against shale gas and oil development across the country and around the world? Simply put, because they recognize that fracking is not the answer to our economic or energy challenges. It just doesn’t make good business sense when you consider the full costs.

In addition to contributing to climate change, fracking is associated with significant costs that are externalized and born by the rest of business owners and other taxpayers, not the gas and oil companies. It equates to short-term economic boom and long-term bust. Fracking threatens the economic development potential of major business sectors, including tourism, recreation, real estate, agriculture, food and restaurants, wine, beer and other beverage companies that depend on clean water, our main street businesses and more.

Businesses are saying yes to renewables because they value sources of energy that are clean, that do not exacerbate the pace and severity of climate change, that generate jobs and that support local economies. Investors appreciate the value of putting their money into renewable energy companies because studies show the growth potential as well as the job creation opportunities. These businesses and investors see the exciting prospect for innovation, economic vitality and community health, where the choice between the environment or the bottom line is clearly false.
http://riverdalepress.com/stories/Lets-build-a-sustainable-economy,52627
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 14/06/2013 22:13

History Made as Floating Turbine off Maine Coast Begins Feeding Grid

At a little after noon today, the blades of a floating wind turbine began to spin in the waters off Castine, feeding energy to the grid onshore for the first time in U.S. history. The University of Maine and other partners in the project say the prototype turbine, if successful, could foreshadow a future where hundreds of offshore windmills produce electrcity - at competitive rates - for customers all over New England. But as Jay Field reports, they first have to prove their model can outperform the turbines being produced by a top competitor.

That competitor is Statoil, an international energy conglomerate based in Norway. In 2009, the company began operating the world's first floating turbine in the North Sea. Statoil is now pursuing a $120-million, four-turbine project off Boothbay Harbor. The windmill that UMaine engineers say will ultimately outperform the competition is up the coast, in Penobscot Bay.

Jay Field: "I'm standing on the deck of the Ned in Castine Harbor. This Maine Maritime Academy training vessel is going to take us out to the VolturnUS, the first grid-connected, floating wind turbine in the United States."

"If I could have everyone's attention for a minute please - everyone's attention for a minute. Right up here please!" says MMA's Dana Willis, our capitain for the day. He gives a quick safety talk and we're off.

It's a quick ride - about 10 minutes. Reporters crowd the bow to get a look at the turbine, as it comes into view. It's 65 feet tall with white rotar blades and a yellow shaft and hull anchored in 80 feet of water.

"If you look at the hull, the yellow hull that you look at, that's made out of concrete," says Habib Dagher, who runs the Advanced Structures and Composites Center at the University of Maine. The center designed the turbine and worked with Pittsfield-based construction company Cianbro to build it.

"The tower, the yellow tower that sits on top of that, was made out of composite materials. That's the very first time that a concrete hull and composite material tower were used," Dagher says.

Prototypes by competitors have been made out of steel and assembled at sea. This $1 million windmill was constructed entirely on land at Cianbro's manufacturing facility in Brewer. Dagher say these design decisions are the lynchpin of a strategy that will allow UMaine's turbines to generate cheaper electricity and become more commerically viable than competitors' models.

"Our goal is to get down, in 2020, to the 10 cents a kilowatt hour range," Dagher says. "And that's a very aggressive goal, but certainly a goal were trying to reach. The technology gets the costs down because we're building the whole unit dockside and towing it out to sea."

Ten cents a kilowatt hour is the rate that the U.S. goverment wants to see from these kinds of projects by 2020. And proving its prototype can produce cheap, reliable power is critical, if UMaine and other partners hope to add to the $12 million in seed funding they've already received from the U.S. Department of Energy.

They also need to convince the Maine Public Utilities Commission that their prototype can deliver affordable electricity, "That the technology is feasible and reliable, that you have the capability to install, operate and maintain it," says Jack Ward, vice president for innovation and economic development at UMaine.

Ward says the state Legislature has been supportive of the project so far. For months, Gov. Paul LePage has criticized the PUC for giving Statoil a 27 cents a kilowatt hour contract for its proposed wind project off Boothbay Harbor. LePage says the commission ought to give UMaine a chance to secure a deal for its experiment off Castine.
http://www.mpbn.net/News/MaineNewsArchive/tabid/181/ctl/ViewItem/mid/3475/ItemId/28480/Default.aspx
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/06/2013 08:43

China makes fresh promises on air pollution, pledges support for solar

SHANGHAI, June 15 (Reuters) - China's cabinet approved new measures to combat air pollution on Friday, in the latest step by China's new leadership to address the country's enormous environmental problems, with pollution a key source of rising social discontent in China.

The government also promised to support China's troubled solar power industry, despite problems with overcapacity and ongoing trade disputes with the United States and Europe.

In a meeting chaired by Premier Li Keqiang, the State Council approved 10 anti-pollution measures, the council said in a statement posted on its website late Friday.

In particular, the State Council promised to:

- Accelerate the installation of pollution control equipment on small, coal-fuelled refineries.

- Curb the growth of high-energy-consuming industries like steel, cement, aluminum, and glass.

- Reduce emissions per unit of GDP in key industries by at least 30 percent by the end of 2017.

- Improve indicators used to evaluate the environmental impact of new projects and deny administrative approvals, financing, land, and other support to projects that fail to meet high standards.

- Strengthen enforcement and collection of fees and penalties that companies pay based on their emissions.

- Use legal action to force industries to upgrade pollution controls and establish or revise industry-level emissions standards.

The country's new top leaders, who took power in a once-in-a-decade political transition late last year, have promised to tackle China's pollution problem. The government has made similar promises over the last decade, but enforcement has often been lacking, especially at the local level.

Protests over pollution are becoming more frequent in China, as the country's increasingly affluent urban population begins to object to the model of growth at all costs that has fueled the economy for three decades.

Friday's State Council statement also acknowledged difficulties afflicting China's solar industry but pledged to maintain support for the industry through "reformed methods".

http://www.trust.org/item/20130615043821-4olqx/
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/06/2013 12:23

Wind Farm Owners Face Legal Threat Down Under

(1) http://www.thegwpf.org/wind-farm-owners-face-legal-threat/

Date: 17/06/13

Lenore Taylor, The Guardian

The man who will chair [Australia's opposition leader] Tony Abbott’s business advisory committee is among a group of country landholders threatening to sue a neighbouring farmer for “substantial damages” if their health or property values are harmed by his agreement to allow wind turbines to built on his property.

Maurice Newman, former chairman of the Australian Stock Exchange and the ABC and chair of Abbott’s three person panel of business advisors, was one of seven families in the Crookwell area who signed a legal letter to local farmer Charlie Prell threatening to sue if the wind farm went ahead and caused them nuisance or harm, including to their health or property values.

The letter urged Prell to seek legal advice as to whether he could break his contract with the wind farm proponent Union Fenosa.

Newman last week described subsidies for renewable energy as “a crime against the people” because higher energy costs hit poorer households the hardest and, in his opinion, the science of global warming was “somewhat in tatters” so there was no longer any logical reason to have them.


Oh dear. evillaugh
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/06/2013 12:38

Power Plant Comparison – Coal-Fired Versus Wind

I would like to show you something very important here, something that supporters of Renewable Power conveniently neglect to mention. To demonstrate this, I’m going to construct a comparison between coal-fired power and wind power.

To do this comparison, I’m going to spend exactly the same amount of money both for the coal-fired plant and the wind plant, and because I live here in Australia, I’ll be doing it in Australian Dollars, but as the cost factor is not the part I’ll be drawing your attention to, that cost is mentioned just as an indicator, and for the sake of the exercise, the amounts will be the same both for the coal-fired plant and the wind plant, and at each stage I will give a careful explanation.

Pretending that money is really no object, let’s then construct one of those new technology large-scale coal-fired plants that are now being constructed in China, India, and at a number of other places around the World. These plants are the new technology USC (UltraSuperCritical) plants. The Chinese have now mastered the technology and these plants have been under construction in China for more than 4 years now.

While these plants are indeed coal-fired plants, because of the technology, they actually burn up to 15% less coal than equivalent existing older technology coal-fired plants. That’s 15% less coal being consumed, hence 15% less CO2 being emitted.

Because the technology produces larger amounts of high temperature high pressure steam, these plants can in fact drive generators that produce more power, again, another thing that the Chinese have succeeded in scaling up. While older technology plants typically can only drive generators that produce 660MW, these newer technology Chinese plants can drive generators that can produce 1000MW and more, previously only the province of large-scale nuclear power plants.

So, for the purpose of the exercise, we will be constructing a large-scale coal-fired plant with 2 of these size generators, hence the Total Capacity will be in that typical large-scale range of 2000MW plus.

Now, China can construct one of these plants for $1.2 Billion, a seemingly large amount. However, as everything is so cheap in China, especially labour costs, then there’s no way known that a plant of this nature can be constructed in the already Developed World for that price.


http://grumpydenier.wordpress.com/guest-...ed-versus-wind/
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/06/2013 12:47

Originally Posted By: SBT
Wind Farm Owners Face Legal Threat Down Under

(1) http://www.thegwpf.org/wind-farm-owners-face-legal-threat/

Date: 17/06/13

Lenore Taylor, The Guardian

The man who will chair [Australia's opposition leader] Tony Abbott’s business advisory committee is among a group of country landholders threatening to sue a neighbouring farmer for “substantial damages” if their health or property values are harmed by his agreement to allow wind turbines to built on his property.

Maurice Newman, former chairman of the Australian Stock Exchange and the ABC and chair of Abbott’s three person panel of business advisors, was one of seven families in the Crookwell area who signed a legal letter to local farmer Charlie Prell threatening to sue if the wind farm went ahead and caused them nuisance or harm, including to their health or property values.

The letter urged Prell to seek legal advice as to whether he could break his contract with the wind farm proponent Union Fenosa.

Newman last week described subsidies for renewable energy as “a crime against the people” because higher energy costs hit poorer households the hardest and, in his opinion, the science of global warming was “somewhat in tatters” so there was no longer any logical reason to have them.


Oh dear. evillaugh


Yep another one of those one eyed sceptic supporters.....

Maurice Newman a few "headlines"

Abbott’s adviser hates wind farms, doubts climate change.....
http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/29/abbotts-adviser-hates-wind-farms-doubts-climate-change/

Will Maurice Newman be Australia’s Lord McAlpine? II

http://catallaxyfiles.com/2012/12/18/will-maurice-newman-be-australias-lord-mcalpine-ii/


Yep yoou reaaallly picked the right pony to back evillaugh

It's OK to link climate denial to pedophilia, ABC tells ex-chairman Maurice Newman
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/br...d-1226538690358
Posted by: Arnost

Re: Renewable Energy News - 18/06/2013 13:14

Yasi - just to correct the record: It was Robin Williams who equated climate denial to pedophilia. Newman complained - complaint dismissed.

Quote:
ROBYN Williams: NOW what if I told you pedophilia is good for children or that asbestos is an excellent inhalant for those with asthma? Or that smoking crack is a normal part, and a healthy one, of teenage life and to be encouraged? You’d rightly find it outrageous. But there have been similar statements coming out of inexpert mouths again and again in recent times, distorting the science (of climate change).


And the McAlpine reference is to this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/25/mcalpine-libel-legal-runaway-train

McAlpine was slurred as a pedophile - and so in effect was Newman. in his case the slur was retracted quickly, while in the case of ABC: An ABC spokeswoman said the complaint was dismissed because the editorial context of the segment was reasonable, meaning “harm and offence” was justified.

There you go. You can call us as bad as pedos at will and with impunity for daring to question the "religion".
Posted by: CeeBee

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 10:51



Wind taken out of protesters’ sails in Canberra

Callum Davidson and deputy editor Sandi Keane report from Melbourne and Canberra on a tale of two cities and three rallies — or rather two and a sorry fizzer.


The pro-wind rally


The anti-wind rally

THE GLOVES CAME OFF today in Melbourne in the phony war waged against wind farms whilst in Canberra, the pro-renewables rally stole the show from the shadowy anti-wind pressure group, Stop These Things.

Morten Albaek, Senior Vice-President, Vestas Wind Systems, chose Australia, the hotbed of anti-wind activity, to launch its fight against the campaign by vested interests and climate skeptics:

“The wind industry is being attacked by media-savvy and politically influential adversaries who often display a brazen disregard for factual information. The “Act on Facts” campaign is our way of fighting back.”

Speaking at the University of Melbourne today, Albaek said the industry has been too conservative:

“Today it’s gloves off. We’re stepping up our game to fight back but with one big difference — it will be fact-based.”

An impressive line-up of speakers including the master debunker of the mythical “Wind Turbine Syndrome”, Professor Simon Chapman, attracted a large crowd of enthusiastic renewables supporters. Chapman’s reading of the public mood that the community is no longer buying the fear campaign was certainly played out in Canberra, as Callum Davidson’s photos show.

In the capital, a lackluster turnout of barely one hundred protesters emerged from the heavy morning fog and filed onto the lawns of Parliament House in Canberra. They came from Crookwell, Mudgee, Yass and a few stalwarts from Western Australia and far North Queensland. Their slogans carried the same gripe: no more windfarms.

Headlining this event was the staunchly anti-windfarm and vocal climate change skeptic, Alan Jones. The popular shockjock announced his unwavering support for their cause:

“I say the same thing to everyone, if you want windfarms why not put them on Macquarie Street, or on ANZAC Parade! That’s where the people live and use electricity.”

Other speakers at the event included a few rogue MPs – Liberal Senator Chris Back and retiring National Senator, Ron Boswell, DLP Senator John Madigan – as well as local Indigeneous elder, Shane Mortimer, and Alan Moran of Australia’s climate skeptic factory, the Institute of Public Affairs. The much-touted Nick Xenophon was nowhere to be seen having made his non-appearance decision quite clear yesterday on his Facebook. Seems Independent Australia was one of the few in the media who bothered to check. Organisers of the antis, Stop These Things, didn’t and still trumpeted his attendance on its website. That’s the problem when you’re so secretive. No-one knows how to contact you. Senator Xenophon’s media adviser, Sharon Smith, certainly didn’t know who Stop These Things were, who funded them or where they were based when she spoke to Independent Australia earlier in the week.

Opposition to wind turbines ranged from concerns for birdlife to the health side effects (now debunked by 19 reviews) and economics. Interestingly, none of the attendees would go on the record, deferring to their official spokesperson for comment.

A counter rally organized by GetUp and Friends of the Earth calling for more renewables attracted some 500 people packed into Garema Place.

The atmosphere was palpably different. Live music, a sausage sizzle, a carnival.

Charlie Prell, a pro-windfarm farmer from Crookwell who attended both rallies, was open about his opposition to his counterparts outside Parliament.

“I think most of them would be climate change skeptics …. and the fear campaign has frightened a lot of them.”

Not much frightens Charlie who was threatened by the proposed chair of Tony Abbott’s Business Advisory Council. According to the Guardian, former ABC Chair and prominent climate skeptic, Maurice Newman, has threatened to sue his neighbour for “substantial damages” if his health and property is harmed by any wind turbines built on Prell’s property.

Speakers Greens Leader, Senator Christine Milne, Independent MP Tony Windsor and Labor MP and Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change, Yvette D’Ath, stressed the importance of the renewable energy target and the role of windfarms in making that happen.

The crowd was animated and vocal.

Tony Windsor received the largest cheer of the rally when he said:

“The best thing about being here is that Alan Jones isn’t.”

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/wind-taken-out-of-protesters-sails-in-canberra/
Posted by: Bill Illis

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 11:05

Originally Posted By: CeeBee


Wind taken out of protesters’ sails in Canberra

Callum Davidson and deputy editor Sandi Keane report from Melbourne and Canberra on a tale of two cities and three rallies — or rather two and a sorry fizzer.


The pro-wind rally


The anti-wind rally




The pro-Wind people are those that don't have windmill in their backyard and can afford to pay higher taxes to subsidize wind energy.

The anti-wind crowd (which was obviously much larger than the cropped picture) are those that live next to the windmills.
Posted by: refstar

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 11:11

Not only that, what's the bet pro-wind people have no jobs......and are being supported by the anti-wind people wink
Posted by: KevD

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 11:50

Originally Posted By: refstar
Not only that, what's the bet pro-wind people have no jobs......and are being supported by the anti-wind people wink

Yawn. Absolute rubbish. The polarisation on this forum is mindblowing. No wonder the user numbers are down - wish there was a way to remove all the climate bullshit from the forum list...
Posted by: Jax

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 12:59

There's some twisted logic getting around in these forums, for sure Bello Boy.

In one breath we're told by some here that the people who can afford to install solar panels are the "haves" - some nasty breed who have money apparently to throw around with abandon and who give no thought to the "have nots" - the latter being the ones who apparently prop up the system that allows all this unfairness to occur. So logically, these selfish solar supporters (the "haves", remember) are presumably the same people who might also support wind, right? Well, no, apparently not; here we now read that they're most likely unemployed, and therefore must surely be of the "have not" variety being supported by... Go figure.

As for Alan Jones: “I say the same thing to everyone, if you want windfarms why not put them on Macquarie Street, or on ANZAC Parade! That’s where the people live and use electricity.”

Umm, so does he apply that same logic to those who want nuclear power and/or more coal-fired power stations?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 14:12

Hang on, don't the sceptics claim that the only people who can afford renewables like solar are the wealth ones? so how can they be unemployed?

Seems very strange, back 30-40 years ago solar was seen as the "domain for hippies" now it is mainstream in society and over $1 million, average (not wealthy) average householders have solar power installed, and the other thing that gets me is everyone wants to complain about rising power costs but does not want to do anything about it!
Install solar and you will save on your power bills, it is that simple!

And the thing with Alan Jones, if Nuclear was so safe they why don't the build nuclear power stations in the city? smirk grin
Posted by: refstar

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 14:17

Originally Posted By: Bello Boy
Originally Posted By: refstar
Not only that, what's the bet pro-wind people have no jobs......and are being supported by the anti-wind people wink

Yawn. Absolute rubbish. The polarisation on this forum is mindblowing. No wonder the user numbers are down - wish there was a way to remove all the climate bullshit from the forum list...


Talk about the 'Hypocrites of the Year' award. The most polarising on here are the Warmista Trolls who demand all swallow their climate "".
Posted by: Jax

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 14:25

Oh please refstar. That WT label is going to get old very quickly. I've just read it twice in under minute.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 14:29

If you can't handle the heat get out of the warming debate! grin
At Least we don't have to revert to the proverbial "verbal attack" when sceptics can't get their point across. smile
How are the "gulflines" up your way there reefstar? smirk
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 19/06/2013 18:06

You can build a nuclear power station or coal fired power station next door to me at the drop of a hat guys. Unlike some alarmists here I don't have a problem with either one.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 08:22

Island energy efficient

SINCE introducing its energy-saving project earlier this year, 85 per cent of Turtle Island in the Yasawas is now powered by 1000 solar panels.

Making the switch from diesel fuel to solar panels,
the environmentally-conscious resort has witnessed a large reduction in fuel usage and cost.

"The whole island is now entirely dependent on the solar panels," said resort manager Alexander Weiss.

"We now use about one megawatt of power daily and that is a big improvement from before we had the panels."

Mr Weiss said the vision of resort owner Richard Evanson to maintain the pristine environment was the reason behind the project.

"Making sure that the island and its environment with its greenery and forests are preserved has been a driving force for Mr Evanson and the people who work here."

Guest service manager Arthur Sladden Druma said as part of the resort's environmental conservation program they had planted a total of 10,000 mahogany trees on the island.

http://www.fijitimes.com/story.aspx?id=237345
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 08:37

The German Solar Disaster: 21 Billion Euros Burned
Date: 19/06/13

(1) http://www.thegwpf.org/german-solar-disaster-21-billion-euros-burned/

Thiemo Heeg, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung

Large German companies such as Siemens and Bosch are abandoning the solar industry. Their strategies resulted in debacles – their investments in solar power companies cost them billions.

The author and former television journalist Franz Alt is a militant solar lobbyist. On his website, the 74-year-old, who wrote his doctoral thesis about Konrad Adenauer, gushes: “The sun sends daily 15,000 times more energy than all six billion people consume currently. This offer, we feel, is a godsend. We use the energy from the boss himself very much. It is environmentally friendly, climate-friendly, it’s free and yet sufficient for 4.5 billion years. We assure you that the sun has never sent us a bill.”

Could it be that Alt has solar panels on the roof (and thus has benefited from the lush subsidies for solar power for years), but no solar stocks in the portfolio? If he had, he would see the thing about solar energy being “free” a bit different: because the sun does send an invoice after all. Although not to him; but to the broad band of small shareholders, for example, who believed in the growth of the industry in the good times and eagerly bought shares – or to many large corporations which also invested in solar power and solar heat, and now withdraw disillusioned from their investments.

Green strategy resulted in debacle

Recently, Siemens had to make this expensive experience. On Monday, the group announced that the solar division will shut down. By the spring of next year, the loss-making division is to be completely closed. Thus, a final attempt, lasting seven months, to find a buyer was ultimately unsuccessful. Affected by this decision are 280 employees, most of them in Israel. With the purchase of the Israeli company Solel, CEO Peter Löscher entered the market for solar thermal systems, from which he had expected rapid growth. The strategy resulted in a debacle: All in all, Siemens lost around one billion Euros. The closure alone will cost the company a double-digit million amount.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 11:20

Obama to expand renewable energy and cut pollution

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama is planning a major push against the pollution blamed for global warming in an effort to follow promises he made at the start of his second term.

"This is the global threat of our time," Obama said in a speech Wednesday in Berlin.
The plan is to use Obama's executive powers - which don't require Congress approval - to expand renewable energy and boost the energy efficiency of appliances and buildings, said Obama's senior energy and climate adviser, Heather Zichal. She said the Environmental Protection Agency was preparing to use its authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate heat-trapping pollution from coal-fired power plants. Zichal spoke at a forum in Washington.
The plan comes as Obama has been under increasing pressure from environmental groups and lawmakers from Northeast states harmed by last year's Superstorm Sandy to cut pollution from existing power plants, the largest source of climate-altering gases. Several major environmental groups and states have threatened to sue the administration to force cuts. And last week, former Vice President Al Gore, a prominent climate activist and fellow Democrat, called on Obama to go beyond "great words" to "great actions."
It was unclear whether the White House plans would include controls on existing power plants. An administration official, who wasn't authorized to comment on the plan by name, said the White House was still weighing it. But since the administration has already proposed action on future power plants, the law likely would compel it to eventually tackle the remaining plants, or it would be forced to through litigation.
Obama's remarks on Wednesday echoed comments he made in his State of the Union and inaugural speeches this year.
"For the sake of future generations, our generation must move toward a global compact to confront a changing climate before it is too late," Obama said.
Some environmentalists urged the president to take action.
"President Obama deserves praise for including climate change among the long-term threats facing us all," said Ned Helme, president of the Center for Clear Air Policy, an environmentally friendly think tank. "But he should do more than talk about the problem. The president needs to put the full force of his office behind new regulations that will truly curb greenhouse gas emissions."
One hot issue in among environmentalists is the proposed Keystone XL oil pipeline, which would carry oil extracted from tar sands in western Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast.
Canada's prime minister has pushed for the pipeline, but opponents call the $7 billion project a "carbon bomb" that would carry "dirty oil" and exacerbate global warming.
The State Department, which must approve the project because it crosses an international border, has concluded in an environmental evaluation that other means of transporting the oil would be worse from a climate perspective.


Read more: http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/06/oba...l#ixzz2WiOtCH2O
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 11:29

Plans for Forbes solar thermal project

A solar thermal project near Forbes will demonstrate how cost effective renewable energy can be once its development application is approved.



Three-and-a-half thousand moving mirrors, each bigger than a plasma television, will follow the sun like a field of sunflowers.

The mirrors will reflect light onto five thermal receivers sitting on towers that will heat a central steam turbine, capable of producing 1.1 megawatts of electricity.

The company behind the project, Vast Solar, already has 700 mirrors and one tower at Jemalong Station.

The development application says 15 local jobs will open after building commences in the second quarter of 2014.

CEO of the green tech company, Andrew Want, said they were now ready to demonstrate the financial benefits of renewable energy.

He said investing in renewable energy was good business sense.

“We have a business man’s focus,” Mr Want said.

He said Vast Solar made sure the economics were sound before they set out to build a solar thermal plant.

“We haven’t started with an invention and tried to figure out the economics.”

Mr Want’s background is in law and he views the world with a risk management perspective.

Continuing to rely on fossil fuels to power the

nation is dangerous for the economy, Mr Want says.

A common belief is that only fossil fuels can provide a reliable supply of electricity, but Mr Want said the solar plant at Jemalong would be able to produce electricity after dark.

Unlike solar panels, which stop creating energy when clouds pass, the solar thermal plant will have the capacity to store the heat it collects.

Vast Solar has relied on funding from their research partners to get to this stage, however, Mr Want is confident the solar array will make money soon.

“Our goal is $100 per megawatt hour,” Mr Want said.

Currently the wholesale price for electricity is around $60 per megawatt hour.

The price gap between the solar plant and the price of the energy market, which is dominated by fossil fuels, is due to the clean nature of solar power, Mr Want said.

“It costs more for the benefit of not having the waste.”

While the market puts a low price on coal power, the ash, pollution and health effects of burning coal were not considered, he said.

“None of that’s being costed until now.”



The system at Jemalong Station will produce no waste after building is complete.

Some ground water would need to be extracted, but Mr Want said that would be a “very small amount”.

The company’s plan is to use a method called air condenser cooling.

If things go ahead as planned then no water would be used inside the plant, Mr Want said, although the company would need access to water as a back-up.
http://www.forbesadvocate.com.au/story/1585614/plans-for-forbes-solar-thermal-project/?cs=717
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 12:41

ROFL you can't expand renewables AND cut pollution Yasi. See what is currently happening here in Australia as a perfect example of that not being a logical conclusion when you have wind power feeding into the grid you have to have back up coal fired generation as well, the same with solar. Wind doesn't blow, no power will flow - without assistance from on stream conventional power sources to ensure continual supply.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 13:32

Coal fired would also be struggling without renewables. grin

Quote:
Queenslanders well remember the power outages that plagued us during heatwaves, but we've just gone through the hottest summer on record without exceeding capacity. Rooftop solar has played an important part in giving us this buffer and breathing space to design an energy system for the future.
Posted by: datadog

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 22:26

WIND POWER MESS

It seemed like a good idea at the time...



Tehachapi, CA – Tehachapi’s four wind turbines, purchased over a decade ago to help power the city’s wastewater treatment plant, may soon go to wind power heaven, victims of rising electric rates and maintenance costs...

Purchased a little more than a decade ago...

... now some question whether the turbines actually cost more money, in terms of electricity usage and maintenance expenses, than they generate in power.

...it seemed like a good idea at the time

...the turbines themselves, intended as renewable energy generators, must draw significant amounts of electricity from traditional non-renewable sources when being started. This can ... result in thousands of dollars in added energy costs



http://www.examiner.com/article/tehachapi-s-four-turbines-may-be-scuttled







.
Posted by: datadog

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 22:36

Quote:
Coal fired would also be struggling without renewables.


So instead of building reliable power stations we have wasted huge amounts of money on enviro bling...

QLD government-owned power companies have allowed electricity network to deteriorate to a level where it can't meet current demand or future growth - and a massive rebuilding program is needed.
Distributors have focused on improving financial results and neglected service quality. Expenditure was cut at the expense of network condition. Network now operates above prudent percentage of capacity - a situation that results from decisions around 1989 to work assets harder - and take greater risk...


http://cpds.apana.org.au/Documents/Crisis_in_GQ/Articles/electricity_failure.htm









.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 20/06/2013 23:26

No they wouldn't be Yasi and well you know it as I have proved at least 20 times by posting economic reports, news articles, cost breakdowns and all manner of information.

If Australia (or any other country for that matter) hadn't built a single renewable project we wouldn't have power prices skyrocketing because of a failed green experiments sucking subsidies from consumers as mandated by the state and federal governments via RET's and without those your precious solar power will evaporate like last nights dew. Germany, France, UK, Belgium, Denmark Spain and every other country that has these devices is going broke trying to maintain a dodgy power supply mechanism propped up by subsidies.

You keep banging on about miners getting fuel subsidies but did you ask for the reason they don't have to pay it? For the same reason farmers don't and the same reason fishermen don't. It is because the vehicles are not using public roads. While your at it did you realise that the military pay production and transport costs only for fuel no sales tax and no state taxes for military vehicles so I guess you can call that a subsidy as well then. Oh and they also don't have Registration or carry 3rd party insurance either so that's another subsidy - just like farm machinery and mining equipment.

Australian's can't afford renewables. That isn't just me saying it, that is every person who pays a ever growing power bill.

Your lefty green mates might think it is a cool idea but the basic fact is they cost a huge amount to run and will never, ever make a profit in their present form. Why would you think for 1 second that we could make them viable if they have failed to do so in every country that has built them? Is Australia some magical continent where only science theory works but we can suspend the laws of physics just because you think we should?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 08:45

Originally Posted By: SBT
No they wouldn't be Yasi and well you know it as I have proved at least 20 times by posting economic reports, news articles, cost breakdowns and all manner of information.

If Australia (or any other country for that matter) hadn't built a single renewable project we wouldn't have power prices skyrocketing because of a failed green experiments sucking subsidies from consumers as mandated by the state and federal governments via RET's and without those your precious solar power will evaporate like last nights dew. Germany, France, UK, Belgium, Denmark Spain and every other country that has these devices is going broke trying to maintain a dodgy power supply mechanism propped up by subsidies.

You keep banging on about miners getting fuel subsidies but did you ask for the reason they don't have to pay it? For the same reason farmers don't and the same reason fishermen don't. It is because the vehicles are not using public roads. While your at it did you realise that the military pay production and transport costs only for fuel no sales tax and no state taxes for military vehicles so I guess you can call that a subsidy as well then. Oh and they also don't have Registration or carry 3rd party insurance either so that's another subsidy - just like farm machinery and mining equipment.

Australian's can't afford NOT TO HAVE renewables. grin That isn't just me saying it, that is every person who pays a ever growing power bill.

Your lefty green mates might think it is a cool idea but the basic fact is they cost a huge amount to run and will never, ever make a profit in their present form. Why would you think for 1 second that we could make them viable if they have failed to do so in every country that has built them? Is Australia some magical continent where only science theory works but we can suspend the laws of physics just because you think we should?



That is absolute rubbish and you know it, like i have posted before the majority of the price increases have nothing to do with renewables, the bulk of it come down to privatization, like i have posted before, back in the 90's when Jeffy k had the brilliant idea to sell of the power industry because he needed buckets of cash.

It seemed like every single power bill we received after that was always more than the previous, even though we used less to the same amount of power each time, and that is even before renewables were on the scene. So how can you blame renewables for that?

The bulk of the increases to power are infrastructure related, because they either have to update their infrastructure (poles and wire) because the didn't do prior maintenance or they need to increase the capacity of the network to cover the increase becauses of all the power hungry devices.
Look at the massive increase in home based air conditioners that are now installed in nearly every home? they would have to be one of the single reasons why power bills have skyrocketed, and the network can't cope because of it.

If it is not only you saying about renewables then why was the turnout for the anti-wind rally so pathetic? it was a perfect opportunity for the anti renewables scammers to show their hand, but it FAILED
Posted by: datadog

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 11:13

The disconnect of people who live of the public purse...

Quote:
If it is not only you saying about renewables then why was the turnout for the anti-wind rally so pathetic? it was a perfect opportunity for the anti renewables scammers to show their hand, but...


I been watching a shed being built on a neighbouring block of land fer a week or so.

The shed is being built by a local contractor i have known in passing for many years. He's an older chap.

It appeared the contractor is building the fairly large shed all by himself. From site prep to now erecting. Normally he has a crew to help.

Yesterday i watched as the contractor used a crane to lift an overhead beam into near position, then he runs around to his lift work platform, manhandles the large beam and rattles in a few bolts, then runs back to the crane to adjust the other end of the beam, then runs back to the work lift, rattles in a few bolts... and so on.

I couldn't stand watching for long so went and asked where his workforce were. Holidays, sick, etc... I offered to help though workplace regs etc so he couldn't accept.

The old contractor has some definite views about the current state of this country and i'm sure he would love to attend protest rally's and wave colourful placards around though he has a family to support, tax's to pay, that sort of thing.

The contractor only really has the time for his one way to protest. His day to vote.









.




Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 12:24

The way i see it is if you want to own all of these "must have" power hungry devices then you are going to pay for it with high electricity prices.

The amount of power consumed 20-30 years ago compared to now has dramatically increased, so if you compared power bills from 20-30 years ago to now they would be MUCH different (even accounting for inflation)
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 12:42

The other option I guess Yasi is to not??? That would include your heater, aircon, hot water heater, and bugger it, may as well turn the lights out too??? Now those who have gas, it maybe cheaper to run the heater and water..... for now.. But they can still turn off their aircon and lights..... Yay.. I'm saving the planet and saving money.....
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 13:00

If your house is built to suit your climate then heating and cooling should not be a drama, our house is built to suit our climate and we don't have air conditioning or heating.
Not to mention the 2 fridges, freezer 50 inch plasma tv, then the other TV's in all the other kids rooms, 2000 watt kettle,toaster,coffee maker, bread maker and not to mention all those appliances that are sitting there on standby, just wasting power with their "pretty red light"
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 17:02

Would be interesting building a house down here to suit the climate.... No heating or cooling??? Bahahahaha We will running on 7-8 days of -3's early next week... Just goes to show who lives in the perfect climate!!!!! Bring on global warming I say... But how others choose to live has nothing to do with you!! That's societies choice. Placing people onto the poverty line by the greens idealism is a joke!! If the greens choose to live like Neanderthal man then that's their choice.. And good luck with that..
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 20:47

That's right people want to live in little exposed "boxes" with no eaves,no verandah or the like.Haven't you heard of insulation? double glazed windows? solar hot water?
If people in England can build "energy efficient" houses the surely the should be able to do it in Victoria.
Posted by: datadog

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 21:27

.


I recently traveled through the Carbondale section of Pennsylvania. Wind turbines have been allowed to flourish there. They are not simply part of the landscape. They are the landscape. Pure and simple, the wind turbines clearly, eerily dominate everything in that area.

— Editorial, Catskill Mountain News, Oct. 25, 2006










.
Posted by: bundybear

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 22:08

Just an interesting conversation between hubby and I today.

Bloody freezing weather for us normally warm spot place. I turned on a heater in the bathroom so I could have a nice warm room to hop out of the shower into to dry off in. I probably do that at best half a dozen times a year.

He commented on my power saving going down the drain. Yes, I am the one who turns off every light but one in the house at night. The one who cooks over an open fire when I can to save our bills.

I replied back something like "They tell us our standards of living are so much higher now. I am not sure how. I am still feeding the family in our budget, hence the same soup on the table tonight I grew up on. Made of beef bones sold as dog food with the addition of grains and veg. Same use of open fires to complete things around the house"

Yes, my house now has reverse cycle aircons, the cheapest to run I am told. They are rarely on. They are used to heat the house when it is closed up then turned off and the residual heat is appreciated. Once it is gone it is back to the old fashioned jammies, wool slippers, gown and multiple blankies on the bed. I remember when I was a child we had at least one kero heater on all night.

We have a solar hot water system. For some odd reason it doesn't like the current cloudy weather and doesn't produce enough hot water. That means it must be power boosted to do so. Instead of doing that I have cut shower times and availability down to suit the system. When I was a kid it came from the system connected to the wood burning stove and hot water never really ran out for a family of 7.

Our house is no larger than those I grew up in. It is more environmentally friendly with insulation all round, solar hot water yet I still have to think about the bills. Or more so.

Why is it that with a bigger pay packet, a better built house we can't afford to be as warm as we once were? As a kid all the lights would be on in the house, now we have one?

I don't begrudge some things like a harder life. It has helped to keep my family grounded. There has never been a play station in our house.

Has our standard of living really increased?
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 21/06/2013 23:56

And build the same house in Vic that the ancient poms did and you'd live the same length of time.... about 35 years of age!!!you are such an arrogant piece of work.. You think that you are totally self reliant.. but your equipment has a life span..
Posted by: bundybear

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 00:36

Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
And build the same house in Vic that the ancient poms did and you'd live the same length of time.... about 35 years of age!!!you are such an arrogant piece of work.. You think that you are totally self reliant.. but your equipment has a life span..


May I ask to whom you are speaking??
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 01:04

I would say YS, bundybear, not you. (self reliant)

Meanwhile YS:
Quote:
Haven't you heard of insulation? double glazed windows? solar hot water?

Unfortunately YS not everyone lives in THEIR OWN HOME, like myself and partner and 7 other couples that live in a block of 8 RENTED units.

I'm sure that my landlord / real estate agent will install double glazed windows and solar hot water to ALL 8 units if we ask them.



NOT!

Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 08:01

Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
And build the same house in Vic that the ancient poms did and you'd live the same length of time.... about 35 years of age!!!you are such an arrogant piece of work.. You think that you are totally self reliant.. but your equipment has a life span..


You have a very short fuse mate.

I am talking about MODERN DAY England, they have evolved since then you know?
everything has a lifespan but what has that go to do with?
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 08:09

Samoa to start $2M geothermal drilling in 2014

PAGO PAGO, American Samoa (AP) — The head of American Samoa's energy office says the U.S. territory plans to begin drilling for geothermal energy next year as part of a $2.3 million project to reduce its dependence on diesel.

Director Timothy Jones of the territory's energy office is also chairman of the American Samoa Renewable Energy Committee. He says the committee agreed this week to an action plan that calls for aggressive goals toward energy independence, including geothermal on the territory's main island of Tutuila.

Jones says his office expects to be drilling its first test wells next year. He is seeking federal funding through grants available for renewable energy projects.

The territory's Power Authority says it uses about 1 million gallons of fuel per month for two power plans on Tutuila.

http://www.ctpost.com/news/science/artic...014-4615210.php
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 08:19

aleo solar develops 290 watt high efficiency solar module with CELCO cells from Sunrise

Oldenburg, Prenzlau, June 20, 2013. The solar manufacturer and distributor aleo solar AG presents its new high efficiency solar module with a current maximum power output of 290 watt. Due to a unique combination of module components, the improved aleo S_19 module can produce more electricity on the same surface area. The module contains monocrystalline CELCO solar cells from Sunrise Global Solar Energy Co. Ltd, one of the world's leading solar cell producers located in Taiwan. Anti-reflection glass, highly transparent embedding film and special cell connectors are further components used to improve the module output. These record modules have been certified by the German testing institute VDE.

"By using the CELCO cells from Sunrise we are able to produce solar modules in series with outstanding efficiencies of 17.6 percent calculated over the whole module area. Sunrise is currently the only cell supplier worldwide who can offer such high efficiency and reliable, high quality component for our aleo modules. With these power classes for 60 cell modules we are advancing into the highest power segment on the market and we are confident that further improvements will follow soon", said Guenter Schulze, CTO of aleo solar AG. The CELCO cells use the rear passivation and local contacting methods and are able to achieve efficiencies over 20 percent.

Sunrise CTO, Dr. Budi Tjahjono, explains, "Our highest power p-type mono cells are not only PID resistant, have an outstanding LID behaviour and a superior low light performance but also show a great temperature coefficient and excellent colour uniformity."

"We have been screening the market for a suitable supplier of mono cells for a while. Sunrise's quality and cost competitiveness clearly stood out from the rest. We are very satisfied to enjoy such a strong collaboration", said York zu Putlitz, CEO/CFO of aleo solar AG.

Sunrise CEO and Chairman, Kuei-Chang Hsu added, "With its strong know-how in production processes and quality, aleo solar is able to fully transfer the benefits from our CELCO cells into their modules. We are proud of the results of our cooperation which puts us both into a competitive market position."

In addition to the improved solar cells, aleo solar uses anti-reflection glass in its new modules that allows more light to penetrate into the module thanks to its thin coating on the glass surface. The EVA encapsulation film possesses better transparency properties, particularly in the ultraviolet spectrum. With the special cell connectors the new modules offer an additional increase in performance: the structured surface of the light harvesting string (LHS) directs more light to the solar cells.

About aleo solar
aleo solar AG produces and distributes premium solar modules and systems for the international photovoltaic market. Since 2009, the Bosch Group has owned a majority of the company (DE000A0JM634), which was originally founded in 2001 and has been listed on the stock exchange since 2006. The premium manufacturer currently has approximately 900 employees and is represented in the key photovoltaic markets all over the world. The aleo solar group has an annual production capacity of 280 megawatts at its plant in Prenzlau, Germany. The company generated a turnover of € 279.9 million in 2012.

About Sunrise
Sunrise Global Solar Energy develops, manufactures and markets high-efficiency solar cells worldwide for residential, commercial and utility-scale power plant customers. Sunrise high-efficiency solar cells generate significantly more power than conventional solar technologies. Sunrise, founded in 2007 by a team of solar technology pioneers, focuses on manufacturing premium cell products at cost-competitive prices. Sunrise's main factory is located in Yilan, Taiwan. For further information about Sunrise.

http://www.altenergymag.com/news/2013/06...m-sunrise/29816
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 19:52

(You have a very short fuse mate.
I am talking about MODERN DAY England, they have evolved since then you know?
everything has a lifespan but what has that go to do with?)

And the reason that is YS is that I can't stand elitism... Those who talk down at people who think they are a class above... You enjoy your solar panels and so forth.. I'll be more concerned in dragging down the green scum politicians and their ideals.... Just like the majority of aussies are right now... The first time I've ever looked forward to voting!!
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 20:13

Originally Posted By: Simmosturf
(You have a very short fuse mate.
I am talking about MODERN DAY England, they have evolved since then you know?
everything has a lifespan but what has that go to do with?)

And the reason that is YS is that I can't stand elitism... Those who talk down at people who think they are a class above... You enjoy your solar panels and so forth.. I'll be more concerned in dragging down the green scum politicians and their ideals.... Just like the majority of aussies are right now... The first time I've ever looked forward to voting!!


You are seriously off track bloke.
Elitism?
you think people who have solar panels think they are better than other people?
hoy boy....
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 20:19

India Combats Energy Poverty Through Renewable Sources

India’s energy program is extremely interesting, given the sheer size of its electrical grid and the dire necessity to develop additional forms of electric generation. Overall, it is the fourth-largest energy consumer in the world behind the US, China and Russia. Yet over 300 million citizens in India function without electricity and over 700 million remain with limited electrical access. What’s worse is 300,000-400,000* deaths occur each year from energy poverty, as burning traditional things like wood and animal waste indoors for cooking purposes lead to respiratory ailments that would be mitigated with better electrical services.

The July 2012 blackout throughout northern India – affecting over 620 million people over the course of two days – was a considerable catalyst to spur motivation. Following the outages, secretary general of the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry Rajiv Kumar addressed the importance of grid modernization, “One of the major reasons for the collapse of the power grid is the major gap between demand and supply. There is an urgent need to reform the power sector and bring about infrastructural improvements to meet the new challenges of the growing economy.”

Oddly enough, some of the states affected by the blackouts in 2012 are also some of the most conducive for solar energy generation. The solar resource map below provided by Wikipedia shows the potential for great solar development along the northwestern and central regions of India.

Many of the country’s natural resources are beginning to be utilized to address energy poverty, and the country is addressing concerns through projects designed to improve electric infrastructure in a comprehensive, but prompt way. For example, the Jawaharial Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) is widely considered to be the main solar operative for the country. Started in 2010, the project’s eventual goal is to install 20 gigawatts (1 gigawatt = 1,000 megawatts) worth of solar power into India by 2022. The project is broken down into three separate phases. Phase I was originally slated to be completed by the end of 2013 and the Indian government has successfully followed through – the intended 500 megawatts (MW) have already been successfully allocated.

On May 9th, the Indian Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE) also distributed a draft proposal for Phase II of the initiative. While the final draft has not been released yet, the early indications are that an additional 750 megawatts of solar energy will be installed between now and the end of 2017.

JNNSM Private Sector Gains

Some companies have already leapt at the potential to contribute to Phase II, including solar module manufacturer Lanco Solar Private Ltd. The prospect of providing solar panels for the project proved to be too enticing for Lanco, as it expects to raise $300 million in revenue through Phase II. Satyendra Kumar, Chief Technology Officer for Lanco Solar, added, “In the second phase of the Jawaharial Nehru National Solar Mission indigenous manufacturing should be encouraged…we want implementation as early as possible and on a consistent basis.” Plans are to begin production of panels by mid-2014.

Tata Power, the country’s largest integrated power utility, has not directly been tied to Phase II of the JNNSM plans, but it is diligently working to invest in both solar and wind energy development on its own accord. This week Tata announced ambitious plans to add 30-50 MW of solar power and 150-200 MW of wind energy everyyear moving forward. The effort is part of a long-term sustainability initiative, which will add to the 873 MW in renewables already installed from the utility in India.

Within Phase II, the MNRE will also create a national offshore wind energy policy to begin research this year, as it was determined the cost effectiveness of pursuing offshore wind was comparable to conventional fossil fuel generation.

Despite the various efforts mentioned, India remains a long way away from achieving its sustainability goals. But the effort certainly appears to be present, and prosperity appears to be just over the horizon for many people in India.

http://theenergycollective.com/ecskris/2...-energy-sources
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 20:21

You do... Remember your post re those who like the pretty standby light?? You stink of elitism matey...
I see out at my golf club, a neighbour has put solar panels on his shed roof at the range of a wayward slice.....Well sure enough, has a broken panel.... Has demanded the golf club to pay for a replacement... The bill, $1000?????? I won't mention what the Pres told this rich doctor due to the forum rules!!! giggle
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 21:18

I do, and tell me what is the point of having a "standby light" that wastes power for nothing?
we have friends who have a TV and the standby light is on all the time, you have to turn it off at the wall...
Posted by: Simmosturf

Re: Renewable Energy News - 22/06/2013 22:58

And the fact that people don't do that has what to do with you? You have batteries that you may not want to drain but those on the grid don't... None of your business really unless you feel compelled to look down your green nose at those who don't??
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/06/2013 09:51

And it begins...Germany towards self reliant battery power...

German solar company launches household energy storage device

SMA Solar, Germany's largest solar company, is launching an battery set that will allow households to store surplus daytime solar energy for use in the evening, cutting energy bills.

German households pay some of the highest prices in Europe for electricity because they pick up much of the cost of subsidising cleaner energy production.

SMA Solar, which is up against fierce Asian competition, says it can help owners of solar panels use more of their self-generated power.

It is Germany's largest solar company and the world's largest maker of solar inverters, a component that helps to feed solar-generated energy into the electricity grid.

The company says its combined inverter battery will give a four-person household up to three hours of extra energy during the evening. The device will go on the market in the second half of this year.

"The discussion is no longer about returns from solar panel installations, as was the case in the past. People now want to know how they can lower their energy bills," SMA Chief Executive Pierre-Pascal Urbon told Reuters late on Thursday.

Current home solar installations typically use only about 25 per cent of the electricity they produce. The rest is sold to the grid at around half the roughly 28 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh) which consumers pay for power when the sun is not shining.

SMA says combining existing SMA devices with the inverter battery enables consumers to use up to 50 per cent of their own solar power, allowing a typical household to more than halve their annual power bills once the cost of buying the devices has been covered.

The company said it will announce the price of the device - which will compete with stand-alone solar batteries - later this year.

ENERGY ROUTER

SMA Solar is now focusing on devices that cut reliance on energy from utilities, selling a small Internet router-like box that allows consumers to control dryers, washing machines and other electrical appliances via their smartphones.

The €340 ($487) box uses weather data to makes sure devices run when the sun shines most. It connects to appliances via bluetooth and also maps a household's energy use.

Urbon said these products were not yet generating large revenue streams but it wanted to increase investment. Although its net profit more than halved to €75.1 million ($107 million) in 2012, SMA Solar has ramped up R&D spending to more than €120 million in 2013 from 108 million in 2012.

SMA Solar gets two thirds of its €1.5 billion turnover from smaller inverters for households and commercial clients, the rest from larger installations for companies and utilities.

Overcapacity and plunging prices in the inverter business have already driven consolidation among SMA's peers.

Urbon said he was convinced the group, with a free float of just 29.15 per cent, could maintain or even expand its current global market share of about a quarter, despite stronger competition and increasing consolidation.

In April, Swiss industrial group ABB agreed to buy SMA's main rival, US-based Power, for about $1 billion. Urbon said he had no interest in SMA being bought up by a large conglomerate: "We would lose what makes us strong: our flexibility."

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/news...-storage-device
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/06/2013 09:53

More than 1 in 10 Germans are already producing heat or power from solar

Noting the key role of solar power in Germany's Energy Transition (Energiewende), the Solar Industry Association (BSW-Solar, Berlin) has announced that 8.5 Germans live in buildings that use solar photovoltaic (PV) or solar thermal systems.

This represents more than 1 in 10 residents of the nation, and BSW-Solar notes that this figure has nearly doubled in the last five years.

“People support the Energiewende, and they are increasingly taking it into their own hands,” explains BSW-Solar Managing Director Carsten Körnig. “It’s now up to the politicians to resolutely move the Energiewende forward and to utilize the significant readiness of citizens and entrepreneurs to invest in the transformation of the energy supply system.”


Storage, US, Asian markets hold promise

BSW-Solar notes that at this year's Intersolar Europe trade show the focus was on technological solutions for energy storage and the intelligent management of solar power. From May 2013, PV systems with energy storage have been eligible for a new class of incentives in Germany.

The organization also states that despite the impacts on European solar markets due to cuts to solar funding and the economic crisis, market demand has increased in Asia and the Americas.

http://www.solarserver.com/solar-magazin...from-solar.html
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/06/2013 10:54

So what Yasi? I have lived in homes since the 1960s that had solar hot water systems in PNG. When we moved back to WA in 1968 we had a wood chip heater and then back to PNG in 1970 we again had a home with solar hot water systems. It isn't a new idea. In fact when on exercises in the bush we used to make hot water for our monthly showers by using a simple 15 metre garden hose filled with water and plugged at each end and laid out on the ground in a patch of sunlight with black plastic bags over it for 10 to 15 minutes which made it almost boiling hot. Using the sun to heat water is nothing new and as for Germany now using it well they are a bit behind the times aren't they?
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/06/2013 11:35

Just saw a ABC News item that the proposed whirly gig farm on King Island has been defeated by not gaining a 60% approval vote by the islanders.
Posted by: SBT

Re: Renewable Energy News - 24/06/2013 12:27

King Island residents uncertain about wind farm future

(1) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-24/no-clear-win-in-wind-farm-survey/4775494


Wind farm Photo: Wind farm (ABC TV)

Map: King Island 7256
Nearly 59 percent of people surveyed about a $2 billion wind farm proposed for King Island have supported more work on the development.

King Island residents were asked if they supported a feasibility study on Hydro's proposed 200 turbine project.

Polling company EMRS says from 878 responses, nearly 59 per cent supported the two year study.

The state-owned company has said it would not go ahead with the next stage of its concept unless 60 per cent of the community agreed on it.

Board meeting

The Board of Hydro Tasmania has just decided to meet today to consider the result.

Hydro's board was expected to meet on Wednesday but will now meet today to discuss the result.

It says it wants to provide a quick response to avoid uncertainty for the community.

Community response

King Island residents are confused about what the result means.

In King Island's main town of Currie this morning, reaction to the survey result has been mixed.

Meredith Graham is glad most residents support a feasibility study.

"But because Taswind did say they were looking for 60 per cent, it does leave it a little bit unclear, " she said.

Barry Barnes hopes it will not go ahead.

"All the power's going to Victoria, and what's in it for King Island?," he said.

Robert Hills says the community does not need a wind farm.

"If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen, the island's not going to collapse in a big heap all of a sudden," he said.

Either way, the community hopes for an end to the bitter divisions caused by the project.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/06/2013 09:25

Greens want to shut fossil fuel plants


All large-scale fossil fuel power stations would be shut down by 2031 under a plan by the NSW Greens, who argue politicians are the only barrier to a state run completely on renewable energy.

Greens MP John Kaye says the party will introduce the Transforming NSW Energy Sector bill when parliament resumes in August.

Transforming the NSW energy sector isn't the only goal of the bill.

'The bill might not become law but we want to force every state politician to face the reality that there is an alternative to burning coal and gas,' Dr Kaye said.

Technological and economic barriers no longer make the move from fossil fuels difficult, Dr Kaye says.

'It is the politicians who are getting in the way.'

The Greens want to replace fossil fuel burning power generators with wind and solar energy plants, pointing to University of NSW research that shows an affordable electricity supply can be sustained by renewables.

Transferring to renewables will cut the '60 million tonnes of CO2 emitted each year' by the state's coal-fired power stations, Dr Kaye says.

Those who lose jobs in the transition could be guaranteed employment in new clean energy generation.

Dr Kaye says changes brought by the bill would cost less than $8.2 billion, a figure that could decrease as technologies improve.
http://www.skynews.com.au/national/article.aspx?id=882606
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/06/2013 09:27

Renewable Energy Becomes Cost Competitive in Africa

The African continent is witnessing a stunning surge in the use of renewable energy as supply sources such as solar and wind power emerge as the lowest cost options for developing countries still struggling with poor infrastructure.
South Africa plans to bring 6.9 gigawatts of renewable energy capacity into play by the end of this decade, awarding 2.4 gigawatts in contracts via the first two windows of its procurement program.
At the other end of the continent, Morocco has also launched its own swathe of ambitious renewable energy programs. It plans to develop 850 megawatts in wind capacity in the form of five projects, which the goal of installing two gigawatts in capacity by 2020.
In the area of solar power, Morocco is on track to build the world’s largest concentrated solar power plan in the form of the 500 megawatt Ouarzazate project. Phase one of the project is already under construction, while Phase two is in the midst of procurement.
Despite a sharp decline in total global investment in renewable energy in 2012, which fell to $244 billion from $279 billion the preceding year, the Middle East and Africa experienced a remarkable increase in regional spending, surging 228 per cent to hit $12 billion.
A new report from the energy team of Baker & McKenzie suggests this trend is set to continue, with solar PV and other renewable energy sources now competitive against conventional rivals, especially in rural areas situated far from grid infrastructure.
For rural African communities, renewable energy has become cheaper than diesel or coal-fired generators once fuel costs are taken into consideration as a result of limited refining capacity and poor pipeline networks.
“Certain categories of renewable energy have become the de facto least cost generation option when compared to conventional new build alternatives,” says Christopher Clarke, founding partner of Inspired Evolution Investment Management.
“The average price for wind in the last bid was 89 Rand cents per kilowatt-hour, which is cheaper than the equivalent cost of cleaner coal new build in South Africa.”

http://designbuildsource.com.au/renewable-energy-becomes-cost-competitive-in-africa
Posted by: snafu

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/06/2013 09:57

Press release from David Ridgway on the latest before the SA Wind Power Select Committee regarding SA’s Yorke Peninsula - home to Australia’s best barley growing country – bar none.

“We don’t want power station,” Yorke Peninsula landholders say

A parliamentary inquiry into wind-driven power stations has heard evidence overwhelmingly against a proposed 199-turbine development on the Yorke Peninsula.

“Landholders made it clear they wanted to protect high-value cropping areas from a power station,” committee chair David Ridgway said.

“We heard that up to 400 square kilometres of farming land could be affected.”

The inquiry is investigating the social, economic and health effects of wind-driven power stations, including separation distances between turbines and nearby homes and possible land devaluations.

“The evidence was that when a turbine is built near a farming property boundary, the non-host landholder can face production losses due to restrictions on aerial spraying of fertilisers and pest control,” Mr Ridgway said.

The Black Point Progress Association submission argued that the proposed Ceres project would make ‘a fundamental change to the character of an exquisite landscape, trashing beautiful countryside for the sake of filling the pockets of developers with consumer subsidies’.

“I was particularly interested in the association’s calculations for carbon dioxide emissions,” Mr Ridgway said.

“It was put to us that each one of the project’s turbine towers would require up to 3,000 cubic metres of concrete, releasing 398,000 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere.

“The association argued that it would take as many as 3,580 years for a wind-driven power station to recover the CO2 emissions from its construction, compared with thermal power.

“On those figures, wind-driven power stations may not be clean or green.”

The association’s submission was delivered by one of South Australia’s most respected business figures, Dr Roger Sexton.

Dr Sexton has a PhD in economics and finance, was a director of State Development with the Tonkin Liberal government, set up the Economic Development Board with Robert de Crespigny under Mike Rann and the Labor Government, was head of the Department of Trade and Industry under Kevin Foley and Mike Rann, and spent 40 years of his life doing developments across the globe.

“With that background, I’d have to say that this project is the most ill-conceived development project I have ever seen,” Dr Sexton told the inquiry.

“With massive subsidies of up to $70 million per year extracted from consumers by the Australia government, why would any developer be concerned about the impacts of the project on the environment or the economy or the residents of Yorke Peninsula?” Dr Sexton said.

“This sort of beggar-thy-neighbour approach to lining developers’ own pockets at the expense of the broader community is what we might see in third-world countries in Africa but not in sophisticated, astute countries like Australia,” he said.

Another witness, fifth generation farmer Martin Hayles, would be surrounded by 30 turbines within three kilometres – seven directly on his boundary fence lines and others close by.

“I will not be able to use aircraft for spraying and baiting and, just as importantly, water bombers will not be able to protect my land, my family and my house,” Mr Hayles said.

A member of Heartland Farmers, Naomi Bittner, was equally adamant.

“This is the most reliable dryland cropping area in the state and we are losing one per cent of farming land a year to urban sprawl and industrialisation. I believe this wind farm is an ill-conceived idea that is set to profit a few and disadvantage many,” Dr Bittner said.

“If this wind farm goes ahead, we will have more restrictions imposed on us. We know that these turbines can shift spray drift from one paddock to another and, if the spray is not compatible with that crop in the other paddock, it will kill it.”

Mr Ridgway said he hoped the committee would release its report by the end of this year
.

Hon David Ridgway MLC
State Liberal Leader in the Legislative Council
Chair of SA Wind Power Select Committee

Posted by: datadog

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/06/2013 11:57

Originally Posted By: SBT
King Island residents uncertain about wind farm future

(1) http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-24/no-clear-win-in-wind-farm-survey/4775494


Wind farm Photo: Wind farm (ABC TV)

Map: King Island 7256
Nearly 59 percent of people surveyed about a $2 billion wind farm proposed for King Island have supported more work on the development.

King Island residents were asked if they supported a feasibility study on Hydro's proposed 200 turbine project.

Polling company EMRS says from 878 responses, nearly 59 per cent supported the two year study.

The state-owned company has said it would not go ahead with the next stage of its concept unless 60 per cent of the community agreed on it.

Board meeting

The Board of Hydro Tasmania has just decided to meet today to consider the result.

Hydro's board was expected to meet on Wednesday but will now meet today to discuss the result.

It says it wants to provide a quick response to avoid uncertainty for the community.

Community response

King Island residents are confused about what the result means.

In King Island's main town of Currie this morning, reaction to the survey result has been mixed.

Meredith Graham is glad most residents support a feasibility study.

"But because Taswind did say they were looking for 60 per cent, it does leave it a little bit unclear, " she said.

Barry Barnes hopes it will not go ahead.

"All the power's going to Victoria, and what's in it for King Island?," he said.

Robert Hills says the community does not need a wind farm.

"If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen, the island's not going to collapse in a big heap all of a sudden," he said.

Either way, the community hopes for an end to the bitter divisions caused by the project.


Looking at the unfolding wind disaster area that is Europe seems to me they would be far better just sitting on any wind projects in Oz.









.
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 25/06/2013 21:26

Solar tech company Silex plans massive power facility in Victoria

Australia’s largest listed clean technology company, Silex Systems, is well on its way to commercialising the solar technology of a collapsed predecessor after this week flicking the switch for a new power facility in Mildura, Victoria.

The facility is feeding 1.5 megawatts of power onto the national grid using highly efficient concentrating photovoltaic (CPV) technology. This is enough power to feed about 500 homes, Silex says. Silex plans to upgrade the complex to 100 megawatts with the help of $110 million of additional government grants.

Silex chief executive Michael Goldsworthy says the Mildura facility is a major stop in the commercialisation of Solar Systems’ technology.

“If successfully commercialised, the deployment of utility-scale solar power stations around the world has the ability to generate hundreds of millions of dollars in annual revenues within a few years,” Goldsworthy says. “This could be a game-changing renewable energy technology.”

Silex bought the assets of collapsed technology developer Solar Systems in 2010 after the company failed to raise a required $100 million to roll out its plans. Silex spent an additional $20 million on reconfiguring Solar’s technology.

The Mildura facility consists of 40 dishes, each made up of more than 100 curved mirrors. These concentrate the sunlight onto receivers of densely packed solar cells which convert the rays to power at 43 per cent efficiency. This compares with around 20 per cent efficiency for standard silicon solar panels. The system takes up much less space for vastly greater amounts of power production than conventional solar.

A one-megawatt facility near Riyadh in Saudi Arabia is on track to be completed later this year as the oil-rich nation ironically seeks to generate more renewable power at home to free up its oil for lucrative export.

The Mildura plant received a $10 million grant from the Victorian government. The upgrade to 100 megawatts will begin construction in late 2014 subject to securing a power purchase agreement and the finalisation of funding arrangements, which include $75 million from the federal government’s Low Emissions Technology Demonstration Fund, and $35 million from the Victorian government’s Energy Technology Innovation Strategy Fund.

According to Bloomberg, the Mildura plant would be the third-largest CPV facility announced globally, and much bigger than the current largest, which is a 30-megawatt facility in Colorado.

Silex has a market cap of $361 million and develops a range of energy technologies. It is also working with US nuclear companies to roll out its next-generation uranium enrichment methods

http://www.brw.com.au/p/entrepreneurs/solar_tech_company_silex_plans_massive_aZNOWDZPEN9YOXw3NzXXNJ
Posted by: GDL

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/06/2013 04:27

The government doesent have any money so thats borowed money Silex makes a profit and we the people pay the interest,go jump. .............GDL
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/06/2013 09:34

SolarCity Inc. : Walmart Completes Solar Power Projects in Maryland with SolarCity

Installations at 10 stores and clubs statewide create over 3.1 megawatts of generation capacity

BELTSVILLE, MD, June 25, 2013 - Walmart and SolarCity today announced the completion of projects at eight Walmart stores and two Sam's Clubs across the state of Maryland that will generate clean, renewable electricity. The energy produced by the new solar installations will generate approximately 4.1 million kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity annually - enough energy to power nearly 370 homes - and are expected to supply between 5-20 percent of each store's overall electricity use.

"Building a clean energy economy creates new jobs and provides affordable, reliable clean energy choices for businesses," said Abigail Ross Hopper, director of the Maryland Energy Administration. "The partnership between SolarCity and Walmart shows that we're taking the right steps."

With over 13,400 panels, the Walmart stores in Arbutus, Berlin, California, Cockeysville, Fallston, Hagerstown, Laurel and Severn, along with Sam's Clubs in Salisbury and Severn will provide over 3.1 megawatts (MW) of generation capacity.

"Walmart is a leader in clean energy here in Maryland and across the country," said SolarCity CEO Lyndon Rive. "Walmart is setting an example for companies in Maryland to follow; it's possible for many Maryland businesses to pay less for solar power than they currently pay for electricity."

This new series of solar systems in Maryland bring the total number of Walmart and Sam's Club stores installed by SolarCity to almost 150 locations across multiple states with additional stores in the works. Last year, SolarCity installed Walmart's largest solar-power system at its distribution center in Buckeye, Ariz.

"Solar power makes sense for Walmart, and it makes sense for Maryland," said David Ozment, Walmart's senior director of energy. "We are committed to increasing the use of renewable energy, including solar panels, at our stores in Maryland and throughout the country."

In total, Walmart generates more than 1 billion kilowatt hours (kWh) of electricity around the world annually. It also has more than 280 renewable energy projects in operation or under development globally. With a goal to be supplied 100 percent by renewable energy, the company is ranked by the United States' Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) 'Green Power Partnership' program as the largest on-site green power generator in the U.S.Last year, the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) ranked Walmart the number one retailer to use solar power in the U.S. Solar energy will continue to play a critical role in the company's renewable energy portfolio and it aims to install solar on at least 1,000 stores in the U.S. by 2020.

http://www.4-traders.com/news/SolarCity%A0Inc-Walmart-Completes-Solar-Power-Projects-in-Maryland-with-SolarCity--17049227/
Posted by: @_Yasified_shak

Re: Renewable Energy News - 26/06/2013 09:36

City of Houston's electric power is now half renewable

Houston, the fourth most populous city in the U.S. and Texas' largest electric load center, signed an agreement with Reliant Energy to purchase more than 140 MW of wind energy output over the next two years.
The purchase of renewable energy credits will account for half of the city’s annual electricity demand and will run from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2015. The city was also designated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) as one of its Solar America Cities, according to Power Engineering.
“Houston is already known as the energy capital of the world, but we are committed to becoming the alternative energy capital of the world as well,” said Mayor Annise Parker. “Purchasing green power reduces the environmental impacts of electricity use, decreases the cost of renewable power over time and supports the development of new renewable generation. A triple win for Houstonians.”

http://www.pennenergy.com/articles/elp/2...-renewable.html