Seeding the oceans not economical

Geo-engineering schemes to reduce levels of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and so reduce the risk of global warming and climate change keep cropping up. Ocean fertilization is one such. This involves dispersing large quantities of iron salts in the oceans to fertilize otherwise barren parts of the sea and trigger the growth of algal blooms and other photosynthesizing marine life. Photosynthesis requires carbon dioxide as its feedstock and when the algae die they will sink to the bottom of the sea taking the locked in carbon with them.

But there are so many aspects of marine dynamics which come into play and which we do not still understand. This has been the warning issued by many experts.

According to Daniel Harrison of the University of Sydney Institute of Marine Science, NSW who calculated the impact of iron seeding schemes in terms of the efficiency of spreading the iron, the impact it will most likely have on algal growth is low. The tonnage of carbon dioxide per square kilometer of ocean surface that will be actually absorbed compared to the hypothetical figures suggested by advocates of the approach is lower. In essence it is going to be a very costly affair!

His calculations take into account not only the carbon dioxide that will be certainly be sequestered permanently to the deep ocean but also subtracts the many losses due to ventilation, nutrient stealing, greenhouse gas production and the carbon dioxide emitted by the burning of fossil fuels to produce the iron salts and to power their transportation and distribution at sea. His calculations suggest that on average, a single ocean iron fertilization will result in a net sequestration of just 10 tonnes of carbon per square kilometer sequestered for a century or more at a cost of almost US$500 per tonne of carbon dioxide.

Now, it is a good question if money should be the deterrent to a good cause. But when you look at all the iron needed to make a significant difference, and all the unknown factors in the equation, it is dicey!

Vortex power

Fossil fuel power plants generate ample waste heat that can be used to make more electricity. Many modern plants have been capturing this heat and increasing the efficiency of the plants. A novel idea of a retired engineer hopes to create a huge vortex of warm air to cause a change in pressure at the bottom in order to drive a turbine-generator.

The concept for creating a vortex, like a tornado, is based on the fact that air, when heated, will expand, become lighter and rise up. As the air rotates and goes up, the pressure at the bottom of the vortex becomes lower. As surrounding air enters at the bottom, and the difference in pressures then drives a turbine generator to produce electricity.

The diameter and height of the vortex make a difference in how much energy can be produced. A vortex that is 200 meters in diameter and goes up 10 kilometers into the air could have the production capacity of 200 MW, Louis Michaud, the engineer, said. He envisions power plant owners to set up vortex-building equipment at existing facilities to make use of the waste heat and increase the overall electricity-production efficiency of the power plant.

A combined-cycle natural gas power plant takes the heat byproduct from burning natural gas and makes steam to run a turbine generator. Doing so increases the efficiency of a power plant from the 40 percent range (simple-cycle design) to just over 60 percent (combined-cycle design).Michaud claims that his vortex station could make use of the waste heat a second time and boost the efficiency by another 20 percentage points.

For his prototype project, he plans to build a much smaller one that goes up 15 meters into the air and shows how it could turn a turbine. Michaud hopes to produce enough results to prove the technology concept by the end of the summer of 2013.

There have been fancy ideas like capturing the energy packed in a lightning – enough to power the needs of the planet’s denizens many times over! But what material can withstand the heat of a lightning? How can it be stored? Many questions but that does not stop people from dreaming. After all so much energy going waste every moment as lightning strikes. There have also been those who want to trap high-energy cosmic particles… Ultimately, it will be the analysis of energy input to that output. Let the most bizarre idea ignite!

Yield drops in rice and wheat crops

The Green Revolution has stagnated for key food crops in many regions of the world, according to a study. Among the top crop-producing nations, vast areas of two of the most populous -- China and India -- are witnessing especially considerable stagnation or decline in yield.

The study was published in the Dec. 18 issue of Nature Communications by scientists with the University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment and McGill University in Montreal, Canada.

The study team developed geographically detailed maps of annual crop harvested areas and yields of maize (corn), rice, wheat and soybeans from 1961 to 2008. It found that although virtually all regions showed a yield increase sometime during that period, in 24 to 39 percent of the harvested areas (depending on the crop) yield plateaued or outright declined in recent years.

Interestingly, the researchers found that yields of wheat and rice -- two crops that are largely used as food crops, and which supply roughly half of the world's dietary calories -- are declining across a higher percentage of cropland than those of corn and soybean, which are used largely to produce meat or biofuels.

"This finding is particularly troubling because it suggests that we have preferentially focused our crop improvement efforts on feeding animals and cars, as we have largely ignored investments in wheat and rice, crops that feed people and are the basis of food security in much of the world," said study co-author and IonE director Jonathan Foley, professor and McKnight Presidential Chair in the College of Biological Sciences. "How can we meet the growing needs of feeding people in the future if one-third of our cropland areas, in our most important crops, are not improving in yield any more?"

The paper suggests two actions based on its findings. First, it recommends working to maintain the positive trajectory for the 61 to 76 percent of croplands where yield is still climbing. Second, it encourages crop-producing regions around the world to look at their yield trends and those of others to identify what's working and what might be improved. Going by what climate scientists say, we can expect more of such drops in yield. Add to it water scarcity and you have enough of a doomsday scenario. The Mayans as also most other civilisations learnt it the hard way as they exploited natural resources to the last bit. Do we know any better? Will a date make a difference?

Scaling up renewables the way to beat the unreliability!

Often, the solution is simple. Even as we go chasing complex ways to solve a problem, the simple and often direct method lies ignored. So also with renewable energy where the challenge has been that of intermittency and unreliability of supply. Storage has been the oft quoted solution, and not without its own set of challenges.

Now consider what research from University of Delaware suggests: By 2030, scaled-up green power could meet the demands of a large grid 99.9 percent of the time. Simple, right? Intermittency and unreliability comes in when you dont have enough. So what best than to boost supply through a diverse range of sources?

A mix of offshore and onshore wind, along with contributions from solar power, could provide reliable power flow during all but a handful of days.

Moreover, researchers found that scaling up renewable generation capacity to seemingly excessive levels -- more than three times the needed load, in some instances -- proved more cost-effective than scaling up storage capacity, due to the high systems costs associated with storage technology.

Inefficiency is something that troubles thermal plants.  Power plants burn three times the amount of fuel energy needed to produce their energy output. Over-generation of renewable power would be cost effective even if all excess energy were simply dumped, according to the study. If that excess energy were harnessed -- to offset the costs of heating fuels, for example -- costs could be lowered even further.

If reliability has long haunted renewable sector, the answer lies in spread! By extending enough wind turbines and solar panels over a wide enough area, it is possible to achieve approximate reliability by shifting power from active to passive regions.

Coming to baseload power and using fossil fuel backed plants as backup, the University of Delaware study found a large enough system of renewable energy generators could feasibly fill its own reliability gaps. In our 99.9 percent scenario, they found that, in four years, only five times would you need to bring fossil-fuel plants back online to ensure power supply.

Ghost consumption

While on the subject of energy conservation, there are some simple stark facts most of us are unaware of. We know about replacing incandescent lamps, buying energy-efficient labeled products, etc. But there are some facts largely unknown. Energy experts have been trying to focus on these small but effective measures to release wasted power. For instance, many devices in our homes such as TV, DVD players, AC machines, music systems, etc have a standby mode. If not “switched off” they can consume as much as 6 Watt to 10 Watts of power!

Mosquito mats if not switched off consume 10 to 15 watts during day time. Frequent opening and closing of doors of refrigerators can drastically increase power consumption. Air-conditioners have a wide difference in power consumption for even 1 degree difference in cooling. By simply selecting a comfortable 24 deg rather than a cold 18 deg not only is comfort assured but much energy saved.

Use of excessive lighting should be avoided and task lighting can be chosen. Using table lamp in place of wall mounted 40Watt tube light is an example for this. Popular Zero Watt bulbs are not zero energy consuming devices. They consume around 15watts of power!

Solar cookers for day time cooking can save a lot of energy. Cookers are available which can be operated from balcony of a house.

Every little but conscious action counts.

Revisiting the n-issue

We need more power. No one can argue that. With only 53% of the rural population having access to grid electricity, no doubt we need more power. The Central Electricity Authority shows that the gap in average supply and demand varied from 8 to 11% between 2007 and 2012, while the peak varied from 9 to 18%. Both the peak and base deficits will, in fact, increase to 14% and 20% respectively by 2017 at the current rate of growth in India.

But, while we need any kind of clean power, the question is whether we can afford nuclear. Managing nuclear plants can even be dangerous. But isn’t handling lead-acid batteries also a dangerous hazard? Even generating solar power is not without its toxic hazards. Think inverter and battery store! Of course, not as hazardous as a nuclear plant but many such will add up to create their own problems.

Now consider that nuclear plants have been functioning pretty well except for the couple of mishaps. Can we rule them out? Or call them only dangerous? Since nuclear has been around for around 60 years, how about a comparison with fossil fuels and their cumulative damage down 60 years? The water they have used and polluted, the carbon they have emitted, the flyash they produce, etc. Can one then dismiss nuclear, especially if the safeguards are established? Perhaps we need to look at smaller plants rather than big ones with their potential for large mischief.

However, instead of constantly producing more power, wouldn’t it help if we learnt to get more from less? Also to turn off the switch when we can afford to. An energy expert was saying that even if every house in India turned off just one light for 5 hours a day, the country would have no power problem!

Storage holds the key for meaningful transition

Science Daily reports on a study from the University of Delaware and Delaware Technical Community College suggests that wind and solar could power the grid 99.9% of the time if combined with a certain amount of energy storage and fossil fuel backups for the rare occasion that clean energy alone was not enough.

Using computer modeling, the researchers explored 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage mechanisms, each tested with four years of weather and energy demand data. The results were encouraging, and because the study focused not just on matching supply with demand, but rather achieving the most cost effective solutions, it revealed some rather useful findings. For one, that it is cheaper to over-build generation capacity to a point where there is excess supply on sunny or windy days, and still an adequate direct supply when demand is high but wind or sun are in short supply.

During the hours when there was not enough renewable electricity to meet power needs, the model drew from storage and, on the rare hours with neither renewable electricity or stored power, then fossil fuel. When there was more renewable energy generated than needed, the model would first fill storage, use the remaining to replace natural gas for heating homes and businesses and only after those, let the excess go to waste.

The study used cost estimates for renewables in 2030, that showed wind and solar at roughly half the installation price they are today, with maintenance costs remaining roughly constant. Add energy conservation and sustainable resource use and what have you?!

Direct grants for solar projects

India has just released a draft policy with the goal of building 9,000 megawatts of grid-connected solar plants by 2017, more than eight times its current capacity. Plans include auctioning 1,650 megawatts of photovoltaic capacity by the central government in the next financial year, grants to cut project costs and loosening curbs on the purchase of equipment from overseas, according to the draft published on the website of the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.

The solar industry will be funded with direct grants covering as much as 40 percent of the upfront cost of building projects. That model has previously been used to build roads, ports, railways and fossil-fuel plants in India, says the Bloomberg report.

Since India began its National Solar Mission in 2010 the many players have managed to cut average costs of photovoltaic power 51 percent. The program has sought to drive down the cost of solar power to the level of other forms of grid-supplied electricity by 2017. But private lenders have been slow to fund solar because of a lack of confidence in the technology, according to the draft.

Higher interest rates and the short-term lending available for renewable projects in India add as much as 32 percent to the cost of clean power compared with similar projects in the U.S. and Europe, according to a report released today by the Climate Policy Initiative and the Indian School of Business. Developers submitting bids that need the least funding will win solar auctions, according to proposed rules. Grants would be paid in stages as projects reach milestones to prevent developers from bidding too low and ignoring plant performance.

That approach seeks to avoid the large, drawn-out subsidies taken on by European governments that pay fixed premium tariffs to clean-energy plants for as long as 20 years. Germany, Italy and the U.K. have rolled backed support as the cost of their subsidies ballooned as installations boomed.

The draft raises the possibility of doing away with a rule that requires projects to buy crystalline cells and panels from local manufacturers. Those companies have filed a complaint alleging foreign competitors are dumping equipment below cost in India.

Keeping up with the Joneses!

Today it is all about data and more data for any good job that needs to be done. So smart meters should be the next big thing in the world of smart power. Because it gives you data and data. But is the data what counts or something else, like behavior science?!

In the US there are growing number of so-called electricity consumer engagement companies that set out to help customers reduce their electricity use, primarily by analyzing their current consumption and finding the easy fixes. These companies are mixing in data from the rapid deployment of smart meters with behavioral science to try and answer a key question: How can we get people to care? The central idea is that by showing people how much electricity they use, when they use it, they can be driven to change. In the process, these companies have found that more important than providing details of how to save power and when to use gadgets, is to show what the neighbors and peers are using or saving!

“The buzzwords around the utility industry today, it’s all about consumer engagement,” says Dean Chuang, a senior research analyst. Studies have suggested that a big chunk of energy — as much as 20 percent — that enters a house ends up wasted. The companies involved in these new efforts say customers who pay attention to their data and use their software products save from one to ten percent on their electricity bills.

The U.S. government has gotten on board, with the launch in early 2012 of the Green Button initiative from the Department of Energy. Utilities that sign on to Green Button provide a simple way for customers to download personalized energy usage data from the utility web site. The first two waves of utility partners will cover 27 million customers, with more on the way. When utilities around the country partner with these consumer engagement firms they can send consumers home energy use reports or audits that give a far clearer picture than a standard bill. These home energy reports can compare usage amounts to other households nearby and, if smart meters have been deployed in a given area, can offer detailed opportunities for improvement — when to use appliances, better control of thermostats, and so on.

Smart appliances can also connect to these systems and allow, say, a dishwasher to run at 3 a.m., when power demand and prices are low. But people using such data are miniscule. Most are energy unaware. And the big culprit for that are subsidized rates for power. Unless the price begins to pinch, will any amount of smart information help change consumption patterns?

Record high emissions

Global carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions are set to rise again in 2012, reaching a record high of 35.6 billion tonnes -- according to new figures from the Global Carbon Project, co-led by researchers from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East Anglia . The 2.6 per cent rise projected for 2012 means global emissions from burning fossil fuel are 58 per cent above 1990 levels, the baseline year for the Kyoto Protocol.

This latest analysis by the Global Carbon Project is published December 2 in the journal Nature Climate Change with full data released simultaneously by the journal Earth System Science Data Discussions.

It shows the biggest contributors to global emissions in 2011 were China (28 per cent), the United States (16 per cent), the European Union (11 per cent), and India (7 per cent). Emissions in China and India grew by 9.9 and 7.5 per cent in 2011, while those of the United States and the European Union decreased by 1.8 and 2.8 per cent.

Emissions per person in China of 6.6 tonnes of CO₂ were nearly as high as those of the European Union (7.3), but still below the 17.2 tonnes of carbon used in the United States. Emissions in India were lower at 1.8 tonnes of carbon per person.

The 2012 rise further opens the gap between real-world emissions and those required to keep global warming below the international target of two degrees. Emissions from deforestation and other land-use change added 10 per cent to the emissions from burning fossil fuels. The CO₂ concentration in the atmosphere reached 391 parts per million (ppm) at the end of 2011.

These results lends further urgency to recent reports that current emissions pathways are already dangerously high and could lead to serious impacts and high costs on society. These other analyses come from the International Energy Agency, the United Nations Environment Programme, the World Bank, the European Environment Agency, and PricewaterhouseCoopers.