Monday, April 30, 2012

Windfarms raise temperature

Large windfarms can increase local night time temperatures by fanning warmer air onto the ground, new research has revealed. The study used satellite data to show that the building of huge wind farms in west Texas over the last decade has warmed the nights by up to 0.72C.




West Texas has seen rapid expansion of wind farms, with turbine numbers rising from 111 in 2003 to 2358 in 2011. The team compared the land surface temperatures at the wind farms with other areas across this period and detected a clear rise at night.


They note, however, that the effect on the air temperature, which is usually given in weather forecasts, will be lower than 0.72C rise because they respond less quickly to changes than land temperatures.


The scientists say the effect is due to the gentle turbulence caused by the wind turbines. After the sun has set, the land cools down more quickly than the air, leaving a cold blanket of air just above the ground. But the turbine wakes mix this cold layer with the warmer air above, raising the temperature. A previous study found a similar effect but was based on data from only two weather stations over just six weeks.


This of course does not mean we rule out wind farms as they have to be a part of the mix. All that the research means is that we still need to be careful before plunging into any new technology. Small wind farms can be the solution instead of massive ones. Or a combination of windfarms with biofuel crops?





Thursday, April 26, 2012

Major road block for RE

A newsreport from Down to Earth notes how renewable energy is facing a serious block in the nation. Odisha government has asked the Centre for a subsidy to purchase solar power, saying it is too costly. Cash-strapped discoms mean a rise in cases of delayed payment to renewable energy developers and can have serious implications for the progress of the sector in the country.


Odisha is developing a 25 MW solar photovoltaic plant under its state policy. The company which won the bid did so by quoting the lowest ever tariff of Rs 7 per unit in February. But the state is reluctant to buy solar energy even at this price.


In Tamil Nadu the state electricity board has not made any payment to the state-based wind developers for a year. The pending amount is around Rs 1,500 crore to wind developers and Rs 5,000 crore to developers of conventional power.


The renewable energy certificate mechanism promotes the sale of electricity from renewable sources to discoms at the prevailing conventional energy tariffs. While the amount is lesser than feed-in tariff, the remaining balance is recovered by selling the environmental attribute of generating this clean electricity in the form of renewable energy certificates (REC). One REC is equal to one unit of electricity which has a floor price of Rs 2,900 per unit in the market.


The purchase of RECs helps a state fulfil its Renewable Purchase Obligation (RPO). It is the target set by state governments for discoms to purchase a certain amount of electricity from renewable power producers. To meet this obligation, the state discom has to either purchase electricity from renewable developers or buy equivalent RECs.


But how can discoms buy when they are cash-strapped? Is it time to review RPOs? Or should the clean energy fund be used? As one observer said conventional power is not really cheap, especially when states under crisis buy power. So is it time to take on the challenge?

Wednesday, April 25, 2012

Slow uptake of cleantech

Clean energy technologies are not being deployed quickly enough, the International Energy Agency (IEA) warned on the launch of its annual report.

The report, Tracking Clean Energy Progress, is being presented at the Clean Energy Ministerial (CEM) summit in London.


“We have a responsibility and a golden opportunity to act,” said IEA deputy executive director ambassador Richard H. Jones. “Energy-related CO2 emissions are at historic highs; under current policies, we estimate that energy use and CO2 emissions would increase by a third by 2020, and almost double by 2050.”


If no action is taken, these increases are likely to send global temperatures at least 6°C higher, he warned.


But rapid leaps forward in technology are possible, says the report. The IEA cites the progress made in solar panels for homes and businesses, which have seen costs drop 75% in as little as three years in some places driving a 42% growth in the sector. Onshore wind has also seen average annual growth of 27% over the past decade.


However, not all clean energy technologies are on track. One of the pet hopes of the IEA - CCS, has not been able to make any progress. And enough is not being made of the ‘hidden fuel’ – energy efficiency, it adds.


Technologies are available but need to be tested adequately before being deployed. After the big brouhaha over CFLs now there is a growing groundswell against the technology and its mercury contaimination. After all a good T5 tubelight is any day better, we are being told after we brought them down to replace with CFLs. Deployments of renewables is not without its share of problems. Conservation and efficiency would seem the best bet for now.



Monday, April 23, 2012

Reflections


What does Earth Day call for? Definitely not slogan-shouting or a day's fast for the planet. Some introspection on how our actions damage the planet and its ecosystem would be excellent.


If there are two things we do that harm the earth most, what would you pick? Well, these are the food we consume and the waste we produce. Our input and output (this covers more than our digestive system, to what our lifestyle outputs).


A shocking forty-five percent of all land on earth is today used for raising livestock and growing crops to feed them. Almost the entire goal of today’s international climate objectives can be achieved by replacing just 1/4 of today’s least eco-friendly food products with better alternatives. Replacing 1/4 quarter of today’s livestock products with alternatives would allow forest to regenerate on a vast amount of land and stop global warming in the next 5 years –- which many experts like the IEA believe may be the last chance to avoid irreversible climate disruption.




Danielle Nierenberg, director of Worldwatch’s Nourishing the Planet project notes how “relatively simple innovations to reduce the amount of food we waste, or to help the urban poor become more self-sufficient, can help agriculture feed the world without destroying the planet.”


Some 1 billion people worldwide experience chronic hunger, and 98 percent of these people live in developing countries. Global climate change will negatively affect agriculture by reducing soil fertility and decreasing crop yields. In preparation for these impacts, and in response to the land degradation that has already occurred, farmers in Niger have planted nearly 5 million hectares of trees that conserve water, prevent soil erosion, and sequester carbon, making their farms more productive and drought-resistant without the use of chemicals.


Agricultural practices that emphasize increased production have contributed to the degradation of land, soil, wildlife, and local ecosystems, and ultimately hurt the livelihoods of the farmers who depend on these natural resources. Ranchers and farmers in Dimbangombe, in western Zimbabwe, have committed 20,000 acres of degraded grassland to be communally owned, grazed, and maintained, with the aim of restoring the area’s plants and wildlife while sustainably raising livestock on the land.


Things are on the right track, but the pace has to pick up from the marginal to global scales.


Talking of waste, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that roughly a third of food produced for human consumption is lost or wasted globally, which amounts to about 1.3 billion tons per year. In addition there is all the toxic waste and plastic we cast away. They litter the planet and may soon submerge parts of it unless we curb our wasteful ways and learn to use less or recycle better.


After all, less input equals less output. The least we can do is leave the earth in equilibrium.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Time for a paradigm change

Let’s put our thinking caps on and look at the power scenario in the country. There has been an enormous increase in the installed power capacity in the country since independence (about 180 times) but the centralised power supply system has not been able to meet the electricity needs of rural India. About 400 million are still outside the purview of the electricity Grid even in 2011.

In this light, there is need to look at the recommendations of the Integrated Energy Policy. Following the IEP, huge additions to such installed capacities are being planned all over the country. The projection by IEP that the country’s electricity production capacity has to increase by five folds (from about 160,000 MW in 2006 to about 800,000 MW by 2032), is seen by some as being exaggerated and done without considering the associated social and environmental impacts. As a result, a large number of conventional power projects, without due diligence, are being proposed/implemented all over the country with huge (hidden) costs to the society. Is this the approach needed or do we need a more realistic demand forecast that takes into account socio-economic and environmental impacts? Should our strategy focus more on demand side management and sustainable energy supply options?

It has been worked out by some groups that a comfortable 1,000 kWH of per capita electricity could be made available using simple measures like efficiency improvements, minimum wastages, responsible usage, and wide spread usage of renewable energy sources. The combined loss to the nation because of the prevailing inefficiency in the power sector is estimated to have crossed about Rs. 125,000 crores in 2011. As much as 35 to 40% of the existing demand can be reduced by efficiency improvement measures alone, making it important that government considers such measures as the first option to bridge the gap between demand and supply.

Whether it be coal plants or nuclear, the recognition of social, economic, environmental and health issues associated must be recognized. A carefully designed combination of centralized and decentralised renewable energy sources alone can ensure energy security, some believe. For instance, distributed energy sources can assist in accelerated rural electrification and reduce overall investment in power transmission and distribution network. Assuming about 30 crore households in the country by 2031-32 (@ 4 persons per house), and assuming that about 10 crore houses in the country will be economically able to install roof-top solar photovoltaic systems of 3 kW each, about 2,70,000 MW installed capacity of solar power becomes feasible. This capacity should be adequate and suitable to meet most the non-industrial loads in the country.

Why then has the IEP focused on adding conventional plants on a massive scale?

Monday, April 16, 2012

The good, bad and ugly

According to Bridge to India’s latest quarterly market analysis, The India Solar Compass, 2GW of solar power could be installed in conjunction with telecom towers in India by 2016. Bridge to India believes there is now traction in the market, leading to the emergence of a new model of operations, the Renewable Energy Service Company (RESCO) model. Up to telecom companies to make use of the opportunity. Meanwhile, we hear from Treehugger that Asia is heading for a huge jump in asbestos-related diseases in the coming decades, according to numerous scientific studies and two of the world’s most prominent experts on public health and asbestos exposure. Not surprisingly, the consequences are expected to be felt most severely in India and China, two emerging economies and most populous countries in the world. “What we can expect is very predictable – an absolute catastrophe of death and disease,” Dr. Arthur Frank, chairman of environmental and occupational health at Drexel University, said in a recent interview with this reporter. He added that the coming catastrophe is “all preventable.” In 2010, almost half of asbestos production was in Russia (49 percent). Other big producers were China (20 percent), Brazil (13 percent), Kazakhstan (10 percent), and Canada (5 percent). Most of it was used in China (29 percent), India (17 percent), Russia (14 percent), Kazakhstan (7 percent), Brazil (7 percent), Indonesia (5 percent), Uzbekistan (5 percent), Thailand (4 percent), Vietnam (4 percent), Ukraine (3 percent), Sri Lanka (2 percent), and Iran (1 percent). India is a country where health and environment norms are still lacking largely. Whether it be about lead content or colouring agents in food, there are no standards being enforced. Is that due to a low price on life? Or a lack of awareness?

Thursday, April 12, 2012

A price on ecosystem?

Ecosystems are life systems. You cannot put monetary value of life systems. How can you put a money value on something like air? But increasingly there is talk of placing a value on the eco-system. IS it because we have reached a point where unless a monetary value is placed on somehting, we do not value it. Take for instance trees. Our cities are shedding trees at a rapid pace as they give way to buildings and roads. And yet, we recognise the value of a tree when caught on a hot day on the roadside. People park cars under the shade of a tree, but do not spare a thought for a tree facing the axe. Guess what trees do for us beyond the irreplaceable belching out of oxygen. They keep the concrete and asphalt of cities and suburbs 10 or more degrees cooler and protect our skin from the sun’s harsh UV rays. Loss of trees means that many millions invested in air-conditioning. Trees, also sequester carbon, a greenhouse gas that makes the planet warmer. A study by the Carnegie Institution for Science also found that water vapor from forests lowers ambient temperatures. “Working trees” could absorb some of the excess phosphorus and nitrogen that run off farm fields and help heal the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico. In Africa, millions of acres of parched land have been reclaimed through strategic tree growth. Trees also release vast clouds of beneficial chemicals. On a large scale, some of these aerosols appear to help regulate the climate; others are anti-bacterial, anti-fungal and anti-viral. We need to learn much more about the role these chemicals play in nature. A walk in the woods, they say, reduces the level of stress chemicals in the body and increases natural killer cells in the immune system, which fight tumors and viruses. Studies in inner cities show that anxiety, depression and even crime are lower in a landscaped environment. A 2008 study by researchers at Columbia University found that more trees in urban neighborhoods correlate with a lower incidence of asthma. The list goes on. Yet, we need monetary schemes to spur afforestation. What's your take?

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Cement sans carbon emission!

In a study published in a recent issue of Chemical Communications, a team of researchers from Virginia’s George Washington University explain a revolutionary way to make lime cement that releases zero CO2 emissions – and costs less too. Given that cement manufacture comes next after fossil plants in emissions, this is very significant. The world consumes about 3 trillion kg of cement annually. Every 10 units of cement will release 9 units of CO2. So it is a huge problem for the increasingly unstable climate we are creating for ourselves. Of the two ways that making cement releases carbon dioxide, separating the lime from the limestone (decarbonation, or removing the carbon atom and two oxygen atoms in limestone (CaCO3) to obtain lime (CaO) with CO2) accounts for 70% of the emissions. The other 30% is because it takes a lot of heat to heat the kiln reactors, burning fossil fuels. Solar thermal power when used not just to heat the limestone – but also to help in electrolysis produces a different chemical reaction without a carbon dioxide byproduct. When electrolyzed below 800°C, the molten limestone forms lime, C, and O2. When electrolyzed above 800°C, the product is lime, CO, and ½O2. These products are useful industrial chemicals. Their carbon monoxide byproduct (in the higher temperature reaction) can be used to make fuels, purify nickel, and form plastics and other hydrocarbons. No carbon emissions. Cheap. And even better, it has wide applications. The next step would be is simply scaling up the fairly straightforward process for commercialization. Surely a welcome find,especially with the massive amount of building infrastructure poised to spring up.

The methane issue

A new study says that methane leaks from natural gas drilling, particularly hydraulic fracturing, are likely higher than previously estimated and concludes that converting vehicles from gasoline to compressed natural gas will actually produce more greenhouse gas emissions unless methane leaks are significantly reduced. The study, authored by scientists from the Environmental Defense Fund and several universities, says that replacing coal-fired power plants with natural gas-fired power plants does lead to a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, though not as steep a drop as gas industry advocates contend. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examines the “technology warming potentials” of different fossil fuels and concludes that better research needs to be undertaken to determine exactly how much methane — a far more potent but shorter-lived greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide — leaks during the cycle of natural gas drilling and transport. The U.S. government has estimated the leakage rate at 2.4 percent, but some studies suggest it is higher. Will this mean the US will go back on its new found gas reserves? Your guess!

Tuesday, April 10, 2012

Wanted: a new law

The world population is expected to soar to more than 9 billion people by 2050. Roughly 70% of the global population will live in cities, which today consumes 70% of global energy supplies. An interesting symposium in the US threw up some interesting options for Energy Collective. Can planners identify potential relationships between systems and/or networks and design solutions that leverage these synergies? These approaches encourage creative use and reuse of resources for multiple purposes instead of single-use applications. Decision-making and time will have to be viewed differently. Data analytics give us the opportunity to time-shift decisions. In the Smart Grid world, we recognize that energy storage allows us to “time-shift” generation. We can also time-shift electricity consumption through demand response and dynamic pricing programs that encourage or reward use at off-peak times. A smart city working with data to predict traffic patterns could enable automated and realtime traffic congestion management. And the most insightful information derived from analytics is worthless if humans fail to take action on that information. How about a new law that helps us frame expectations around data? Data can be created by machines or by humans. Data will travel across networks to destinations, and may be transformed (anonymized), analyzed (correlated with other data), or stored in multiple locations. The author notes how Moore’s Law deals with processing power (approximately doubles every 24 months) and Metcalfe’s Law that the value of a network grows as the square of the number of users grows. And goes on to ask if a similar law that frames our expectations about data volumes and the privacy and security of that data, can help. Any thoughts?

Misle(a)d path?

There is lead in the air! Literally and physically. News coverage has been noting the dangerous levels of contamination from lead in our environment. Among other things leaden, batteries pose a big threat. As more and more households are resorting to batteries (inverters) to tide over increasing power cuts in the city, the question arises: how are spent batteries disposed? DO we have any norm? At present there are no such norms. Unlike many countries, India does not insist that manufacturers buy back the used products to ensure environment safety. The batteries are usually taken back by small agents who use crude methods to retrieve lead which is then recycled. When batteries are broken for recycling, lead is released as dust, which affects the respiratory system. Even kidney failure, brain disorders, etc have been cited among the health hazards. Lead from the batteries can even contaminate ground water. A car battery, which weighs around 14.5kg has 8.7kg of lead, while the batteries used for invertors have nearly 16kg. There is going to be an increase in production of batteries as renewable energy picks up pace. There is need to address the disposal issue. It also brings us to the biggest challenge of how to make solar PV viable on a large scale. While the general opinion has been that communities should opt for local units supplying power for their needs, the battery issue will become a huge problem. As some say, solar PV will be feasible only in megawatts and when tied to the grid, thus making away with the need for batteries. This is pursued in Germany and one can see almost 5% roofs with solar panels, these days. With battery storage interface domestic solar power is not viable financially or environmentally. However, others aver that the cost involved in production and transmission of electricity to the end user is much higher than the cost involved in availing the solar energy via storage batteries. We must look at decentralised generation and address the battery issue with strong regulation. What do you think?

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

It's so simple, yet...

Gardeners in the UK can no more splash gardens lavishly with a hosepipe. With several water companies in the south and south-east of England imposing restrictions from this week, hobby gardeners may face a fine of up to £1,000 if they are caught using a hosepipe. May sound tough action but in times of water scarcity, every drop counts. As we have said, in a city like Bangalore, the groundwater is being drawn thrice as faster than it is being recharged causing the table to sink and dry up in a few years. River water is being supplied from 100 kms away using power to pump it up 500 metres, and this same water is stolen and lost to leakages up to 40 percent! Finally, when it reaches the city, unscrupulous citizens have resorted to guzzling more than their quota by using pumps!! How long can this kind of unsustainable situation continue?? New studies are showing that Chinese cities are slowly sinking as a result of rapid development and excess groundwater use. According to reports, as many as 50 cities across the country are affected by soil subsidence, including the country’s largest -Shanghai. Rather than looking to 'greener' sources, which are as unsustainable at times, perhaps it is time we adopted smaller and simpler solutions that use recycled material largely. Rather than blame fossil fuels, we need to look at the whole picture. Can we live in smaller homes, simpler food, use public transport (or our legs where possible)? Adopt community living that fosters a sense of sharing? Tough, but necessary if we choose to plan for a tomorrow.

Monday, April 2, 2012

Post earth-hour

Now that Earth Hour has ticked by, it's time for some introspection. What does it mean for us? A time to bring out the candles? A time to join some million others in a campaign? Or, a time to sit quietly and think on the path we want to take? A time to think of how fortunate we are to have a planet of plenty for the teeming billions? Today our growing consumerism is depleting the earth's resources at a rate 35 percent faster than it can regenerate. Whether it is minerals or even more precious resource like water, we are rapaciously using it. If somewhere Saudi Arabia is greening its deserts using centuries old aquifer water which will run out in 50 years, elsewhere developed nations are vying for drilling rights in the Arctic! Can we define a new economic paradigm with well-being indicators that count natural and social capital, and give incentives for sustainable production? And do it soon? Are we content to live in a climate of ever-widening inequalities with 20% of the world now consuming 86% of its goods, while the poorest 20% consume 1% or less and emit 2% of the worlds greenhouse gases? Or do we believe in true empowerment that comes with equity and sustainability? Are we keeping our planet as healthy and clean as we keep our homes??

Storage innovations

As we know, the problem with renewables has been that of storage. But that problem is being tackled. Improving battery technology is an imperative. As it stands, but a 1,300 metric ton battery larger than a football field that can generate 40 million watts of power, currently deployed in Fairbanks, Alaska to protect against blackouts, could only, in 2003-4, provide enough electricity for about 12,000 residents for seven minutes. It would take hundreds of units the size of the Fairbanks unit to store electricity from solar and wind to equal the power generated by one coal plant. Other types of batteries have been developed, but some have low “round-trip efficiency”—they lose energy as it is stored and comes out of storage. Lithium ion batteries have high “round-trip efficiency” but are very expensive, and a lithium metal-air battery, when it absorbs moisture from the air in addition to the oxygen it needs, can explode. According to NewScientist, a promising type of power plant cools excess energy and stores it in the form of liquid air, or cryogen. The Highview 300-kilowatt pilot plant supplies energy to the UK National Grid. The process warms the cryogen when electricity is needed; it recovers only about 50 percent of the electricity fed into it, but cryogen plants can be located anywhere, costing far less to operate per kilowatt than batteries. Excess energy from wind power can also be stored in the home, raising the temperature of an energy customer’s water heater or storing the heat in ceramic bricks in a nearby space heater. These devices, run by microchips and remote-controlled by the power administration, then act as a battery, giving back power when needed. Such a pilot program in the US Pacific Northwest saw energy customers having to pay to participate. But research is peeling away the many hurdles. Once we have an efficient way of storing power, nothing should hold the sun and wind from powering the planet.