The Gravel/Argon Battery?

One of the holy grails of renewable energy has always been just how to store energy from what are inevitably intermittent, and variable, sources of power; from the likes of wind turbines, photovoltaic arrays etc.

This sounds rather far fetched, and my initial reaction was - it will never work - but reading through the article from the Guardian in detail had me thinking ....... well, they might just be onto something here.

Worth a perusal.

Finding the energy

It came to me more targeted at 'energy professionals', but having clicked the link I see no harm in sharing here.

If any of you have expertise/experience of energy saving/renewable and low carbon energy technologies and can advise the households involved in the Big Energy Shift your input would be gratefully received. They have asked a load of questions which they would like people's views on.

It has a few links and pages some may value for info, or have the experience to contribute to.

Do love the current 'freeze frame' of Minister Ed Miliband on the home page. Not sure he would:)

CATEGORY - Coal

It's baaaaack! And hence warrants its own category.

Indy - Back to black: return to coal power

Indy - Coal-fired power: 'Clean coal' technology

BBC - Clean deadline call on coal power

Guardian - Coal isn't the climate enemy, Mr Monbiot. It's the solution - Now there's an odd couple squaring off.

Times - The burning question ...

Guardian - Coal-fired power stations are death factories. Close them

Times - NEW - PM stokes row with ‘clean’ coal plan

Not so grand

If ever there was a reason to ponder reduction and/or insulation, this is it: Energy bills break £1,000 mark

For some, that means they are working almost a month in the year to cover this fundamental aspect of life.

NEWS/Commercial PR - NEW RESEARCH REVEALS BRITS THINK GOING ‘GREEN’ COSTS THE EARTH

Normally I am a bit dubious about research, especially on things green... and even more so when part of a press release on behalf of an energy company.

But I thought this was worth sharing, as provided, but suitably editted to share the insights with a little less of the sales pitch. But I will pop in a few links for you to find out more on their offering if so inspired. But would also always advise doing a bunch of research before committing to anything. I rather fancy I have had a few other PRs of late suggesting they are also the only odd ones rewarding you for cutting back. Indeed. But to be encouraged by both suppliers and consumers to be sure!

NEW RESEARCH REVEALS BRITS THINK GOING ‘GREEN’ COSTS THE EARTH Despite increasing pressure to go ‘green’, new research released today (5 February 2008) by Southern Electric shows many Britons remain unconvinced that they can afford to live greener lives. The Southern Electric survey reveals that over half of Britons think the environment is of vital importance and 85% are willing to consider lifestyle changes to save energy within the next 10 years. The majority also believes that making greener choices as a consumer usually involves spending more money; and lack of money is cited as the main reason for not making changes to save energy at home. Independent financial expert and TV money man, Alvin Hall, says: “The Southern Electric research suggests that, while people ‘talk the talk’ on green issues, few ‘walk the walk’ and many use money as an excuse. Some green products do cost a premium but helping to save the planet doesn’t have to break the bank or be a chore. In fact, the average home can actually save around £300 a year by simply being more energy efficient. “Home insulation, energy saving appliances and cutting down on energy consumption all help and will lead to cheaper energy bills in the long run as well as benefiting the environment.” Southern Electric is the first energy company to actively encourage customers to cut back on energy use through ‘better plan’, its unique green energy product. ‘better plan’ is a home energy service that pays customers to cut their bills – giving bonuses, discounts and cash credits for using less energy . The cash credits are then applied as a reduction to the customers’ energy bills.

Over my head

Great. To the pointless, time-consuming (ok, that's the point) barrages on climate change, as a consumer in no man's land I can add government and corporates on energy: NPower blames Government targets for price hike

I'm not so sure I am that concerned on 'blame', but surely we can easily be told just where the actual numbers are derived from and come to our own conclusions?

A tale of two 'e's

Here's something you won't read too often on these pages: I feel sorry for the PM.

And not just him, but any politician these days.

The reason is that screen grab from my daily Indy.

Because those two sequential headlines epitomise the rock and hard place that anyone in power faces, especially and ironically when it comes to... power: economy vs. environment.

Ignoring any enviROi considerations/arguments for the moment, just look at those in terms of stark political choices.

No one said/says it's going to be easy, but one things for sure... I don't feel too keen on trying to warm my home on endless supplies of the Brown stuff: fudge.

ADDENDUM - thank heavens I put in that caveat about the envROI! As I was posting this Dave is posting the same thing with a much more focused view on the detail.

Unlike many arguments, and I see Dave and I maybe diverging, at least on a pragmatic basis, when it comes to the realities vs. ideals for such as nuclear in the future, the lack of carbon capture in the design seems plain bonkers.

Indy - A test of the Government's environmental credentials

Energy Measures Report

The Dept. for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform yesterday published their Energy Measures Report.

This purports to set "out the steps that local authorities can take to:

• improve energy efficiency;
• increase the levels of microgeneration and low carbon technologies;
• reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and
• reduce the number of households living in fuel poverty."

It advises that "Local authorities will have to ‘have regard’ to the report when exercising their functions." So its advisory only then.

Here's a chunk from the Planning Module:-

"Sustainability appraisal will be important in shaping appropriate spatial strategies. Sustainability appraisal is required in revising Regional Spatial Strategies and preparing new Local Development Documents (Development Plan Documents and Supplementary Planning Documents). This incorporates requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive, and includes consideration of the effects of implementing such plans on certain issues such as air and climatic factors. Guidance has been produced to assist authorities with this".

Which means what, exactly? I really hope they have got guidance on this because its as clear as mud to me!

Having had a quick look it appears to me to be 165 pages of gobbledygook, waffle, hot air and wasted effort. Nothing new there then!

Well, there's a surprise!

"HIPs show shortcomings in home energy efficiency" from EDIE.

The average energy rating for properties assessed under HIPS ranks an 'E' on a scale from 'A' to 'G'. Now why would anybody expect any different?

Despite all of the various 'grants' and supposed funding available (Have you ever tried to obtain an insulation grant? It's like trying to find a needle in a haystack! 'Sorry sir, you are outside our designated area'; 'Sorry you don't qualify as you earn over £22K'; 'we only provide grants for the over 65's'; oh, sorry, you're an NPower customer, you might have qualified for a grant if you were with Scottish Power'), the majority of homeowners simply do not have the wherewithal, financially, to invest in cavity wall insulation and the like.

It's all well and good banging on about it ('insulation, insulation, insulation!') but when it means that the man in the street has to cough up from his own pocket, yes, even when it will save him money long term, if he doesn't have the readies then it simply won't get done.

It surely must be time for a simple, sensible scheme to be put in place to ensure that any and every property qualifies for insulation grants or at least a low cost loan scheme. It's not too much to ask, is it?

Further to the previous post ....

..... here is the Guardian's take on the Tory proposals. I think that this provides a more concise and clear summary than most of the rest of the media.

This is the article reproduced in full.
_________________________________________

Under proposals published yesterday the Tories have promised to redefine the measure of the UK's success away from simply measuring GDP and towards a group of indicators taking in economic wellbeing, societal wellbeing and environmental wellbeing.

Climate change

· Set a target for carbon dioxide emissions focused on ensuring global temperatures rise no more than 2C above pre-industrial levels. This means the UK must plan for an 80% cut in global emissions by 2050, higher than current government targets.

Now that is ambitious - and, unfortunately, probably unachievable.

· Reform the European emissions trading scheme (ETS) so that all permits to the utility sector and aviation are subject to auction, a means of raising the cost.

· "Clean development mechanisms" (such as carbon trading) should not be used as a way of avoiding domestic reductions in C02 emissons.

It will be interesting to see how they could enforce that.

Flying

· Moratorium on airport expansion, VAT on aviation fuel in domestic flights, and inclusion of aviation in ETS. Reform air passenger duty so it is linked to the flight and not the passenger.

· Publish comparative details of carbon dioxide emissions on tickets and set up a global trust for all climate change communication.

Motoring

· A new purchase tax on cars of up to 10% depending on CO2 output, as well as a sliding VAT scale between 5% and 17.5%. Vehicle excise duty set at maximum of £500, more than double the present £215 top rate.

Interesting!

· Introduce car efficiency targets of 120g of CO2 emitted per kilometre by 2012 and 80-100g by 2020 throughout the EU.

European vehicle manufacturers are struggling to meet the EU's current target of 140g, the UK trying to enforce even more stringent cuts is rather pointless.

· Place cigarette-style warnings, of a mandated size, on all car adverts.

This will be an utter waste of time if you ask me!

· Introduce a new employer parking spaces tax set at market rate.

Could cause a few problems, especially for bigger businesses.

· Reduce volume of car trips by 10%-17% by designing neighbourhoods where people can walk between amenities.

Errrmm, like, how? My nearest bank/cinema/post office etc. is over 6 miles away.

· Review cost-benefit analysis of road building.

Surely they do this already? If not, why the hell not?

Countryside

· Trespassers and burglars should no longer have the right to sue for damage done to them on other people's property.

That just might win them a few votes!

· Improve the needs test to control out of town shopping.

· Abolish regional government tier in planning.

Meaning what, exactly?

· Double council tax on a home that remains empty for more than a year.

· Relax planning controls on all estates with four or more houses built since 1945.

Also, meaning what, exactly?

· Review the spread of buy to let.

· Local councils, by referendum, able to rule that only people living in a countryside home for 200 days a year or more are allowed to buy the property.

That could prove extremely difficult to implement!

Energy efficiency

· Abolish home information packs, the government's controversial attempt to streamline the house buying process.

· A mandatory code for new sustainable homes, plus energy performance certificates requiring improvements by landlords and homeowners when major changes are made to a house.

About time too - we should have been doing this 30 years ago!

· Financial incentives (such as council tax rebates) plus low-cost capital to help homeowners improve energy efficiency, and reduced stamp duty for energy- efficient homes.

Bring it on!! The most sensible idea so far!

· All public companies to make annual statement on energy use by setting out their energy consumption per square metre.

Hmmmm, I thought that they are already supposed to do this? (Not necessarily by per M2)

· Smart meters introduced over a period of 10 years to aid energy saving.

Again, we should have been doing this years ago!

· Standby switches to be abandoned subject to EU agreement.

Not sure that this is achievable - I'd prefer to ban products that consume anything more than say, 1 watt, whilst on standby mode. Imagine having to reset the clock on your DVD/VCR every single time you switch it on!

Energy

· No new coal power stations after 2020 without carbon capture and storage. Existing stations will have until 2025 to introduce the technology.

Hoo - bloody -ray! Again, we should have been doing this for years now!

· No taxpayer/government funding for nuclear fission, risks and costs of nuclear borne by the private sector. But new carbon price in ETS will make nuclear more competitive.

So does that mean that fusion technology research is still funded?

· Withdraw subsidy for onshore wind farms.

If they are in poor, wind inefficient locations, then yes, it makes sense, otherwise I'm not too certain.

Food and waste

· Bans on the landfilling of recyclable and compostable materials.

Errrrm, wasn't this already supposed to be in place? Or is that just some local councils own initiative?

· 20p deposit on returnable bottles.

Back to the good old days when I was a kid! Bottle collecting for pocket money!

· Incinerators would capture and generate heat.

And put out lots of CO2 and toxins unless mandatorily fitted with CO2 and noxious gas scrubbers.

· A strengthened, legally binding code of practice on supermarkets and a ban on selling below cost price.

Hmmmm, a code of practice or legislation? Loss leading is a way of life for the big supermarket chains, it's one of the only tools they have for gaining market share!

· Reform Common Agricultural Policy but do not cut the amount of money spent on CAP in the UK.

Now there's a can of worms waiting to be opened!!

ADDENDUM (by Junkk Male):

I guess it's part of the political fabric, but it sill seems a shame that whatever one lot does the other lot(s) will trash it all. Anyhoo, as those with perhaps more claim to being green than most, here's what I got sent (maybe there'll be more detail on what was in the report to come):

Greens dismiss Tory environmental claims

Speaking in advance of this week's publication of the Conservative
Party's 'Quality of Life' review, Green Party Principal Speakers Siân
Berry and Derek Wall today dismissed suggestions that the Tories had
gone Green.

Green Party Principal Speaker Siân Berry said:

"It seems clear that Cameron is trying to slide out of his previous
promise that the Tories would support a new round of nuclear power
stations only as a last resort.

"Backing nuclear power makes a mockery of their green pretensions.

"Dirty, dangerous, unnecessary and expensive - support for this
ailing industry comes at a cost of funding for the cutting edge
renewables technology.

Principal Speaker Derek Wall said:

"If they were serious about tackling climate change, the Tories would
call for an immediate moratorium on any more road building or
aviation growth.

"As it is, their belief that a bigger economy is a better economy
undermines any hope they have of adopting the right policies for
tackling climate change."

"The Conservatives privatisation of public transport under Thatcher
is one of the reasons why 80 per cent of journeys are by car. They
need to support the renationalisation of rail as well as reregulation
of bus travel."

Not the greatest in consumer-helpful, specfics-heavy retorts I might have hoped for, especially when reaching back to the Thatcher era at one point.

The Scots do it in a joined up way .....

... why can't we do it here in England? This from EDIE reports on the setting up of an advisory panel that actually looks capable of doing a genuine job on boosting energy efficiency in Scottish homes!

"An expert panel has been set up to recommend measures to make houses and buildings in Scotland more energy efficient, it was announced this week." OK, I'm already thinking yet another pointless quango, but, so far, so good.

But, reading on, by experts, they don't mean quango members, political pseudo types or politicians and civil servants with nothing (better?) to do - they actually mean 'experts'. They are going to "include designers, developers, contractors, assessors and researchers." and will "feature experts from Norway, Denmark and Austria experienced in the strict energy standards of their home countries".

Our English equivalent would have senior civil servants, junior ministers without portfolio, loads of highly paid executive directors, trades union representatives, half a dozen empty suited jobs-worths, a token Polish plumber and number 10's cleaning lady's dog on the panel! All backed up with a huge administrative bureaucracy on massive salaries and gilt edged, inflation protected pensions!

I can almost hear Sir Humphrey - "'What! Have an actual energy efficiency expert on the advisory panel! You've got a lot to learn - that's just not the way we do things around here, old boy!"

When will our lot ever learn?

Wonder if Al has an iPod?

OK, cheap (ish) shot. But in a way it's symptomatic of what 'we' are facing: Gadget boom to drive up energy demand

From Live Earth to events like the one I just attended (review still coming), I am getting more and more convinced that the wrong things are being fussed over by the wrong people for the wrong reasons... possibly to the great glee of those with vested interests in just such things happening (cripes, I'm sounding almost as Conspiracy Theorist as Dave!).

We have all this effort on the consumer end of packaging disposal when so much more can, and should be done at the point it is created. We have vast campaigns on switching off when the things are still being made... and with no easy way to operate as others would require. Flights are to be taxed, yet airports created. Quango after quango created and funded to spend bazillions telling us to do things we either don't 'get', can't do or don't believe, yet meanwhile some truly effective big hits are left ignored.

Not. Joined. Up.

Free infinite energy again!

Well, let's wait and see.

Steorn have been banging on about this magical free energy device for almost two years now, but only a few 'scientists' have been allowed to see and review it. It purports to generate free energy from the interaction of several magnets.

They say they are going to publicly show the device in London today (At The Kinetica Museum, Old Spitalfields - 18:00. Though the Kinetica site, rather confusingly, says it is closed until the 5th July) and are supposed to be showing it on the internet too!

Perhaps if this Orbo gizmo actually works, then maybe they have another contender for the future replacement of Big Oil's current CO2 producing products?

Addendum:

Having found zero news items about this on the morning of the 5/7/2007, I took another look and the public showing has been moved to today. Let's see what tomorrow brings.

Addendum 2:

Now they are having problems with the demo unit, and the display at Kinetica will not open until 6/7/2007 for public viewing of the Orbo free energy technology.

Addendum 3:

Oh dear ...... things aren't going too well. The demonstration has now been cancelled indefinitely due to technical problems caused by excessive heat. See Steorn announcement.

With a track record like the one they are rapidly developing, no-one is going to believe anything they say at all soon!

Alberta's 'Black Goo' Rush

We all knew that a great deal more R&D funding would be redirected into renewables as the price of crude oil stayed high, right? Well, not really ...... in fact, hardly at all.

Although some of the Big Oil players ARE looking at some renewable energy forms, and indeed, buying up the rights to quite a few patents in this field, the renewables R&D spend pales into insignificance in comparison to what is happening right now in the Canadian oil shale belt.

The extended high crude oil price has finally made Alberta's Black Goo commercially exploitable, and the cost to the planet is ........ even higher CO2 emissions!

"The industry already contributing to climate change more than any other is frantically turning up the heat. The process of refining bitumen emits three to four times the greenhouse gases produced by extracting oil from traditional wells, making the tar sands the largest single contributor to Canada's growth in greenhouse gas emissions. Nonetheless, the industry plans to more than triple production by 2020, with no end in sight. If prices stay high, it will soon become profitable to extract an additional 141 billion barrels from the tar sand, which would place the largest oil reserves in the world in Alberta."

For a depressing read see the full article by Naomi Klein at Rabble News. The black goo rush was recently described by the FT as "north America's biggest resources boom since the Klondike gold rush"

All in all a bit of a one-sided match: Renewable Energies 0 - Big Oil 6

And the winner of the prize for the newest destructive eco-disaster is .......... Northern Alberta.

Now I see why we must stop 4x4s at all costs!

Carbon emissions from power stations soar

Ironically, right next door...

Government to unveil greener cars plan

Right hand, meet left.

BBC - Emissions soar from UK generators

H2 Oh... yeah!

I am again grateful to Dave of Solarventi for this encouraging notion on Hydrogen.

This is a fuel I have some significant faith in, IF it can be produced to a reasonable enviROI.

There is also the small matter of reduction. As water, in the form of vapour, is still a greenhouse gas, I don't want to find we substitute one man-made exhaust pollutant for another, no matter how seemingly benign it may be.

Why some get the big bucks

I was going to comment on this, but it has been 'closed' (wonder why?)

Uniting the union

Maybe, having waded through all that, it is my initial thought at reading this: 'Above all, the EU requires cooperation.'

It was 'No sh*t, Sherlock,' followed closely by 'and Gloucester Old Spots will soon be used as eco-jumbos by Virgin Atlantic.'

Shame that will only bee read here.

Now is the nuclear winter of my discontent

Just when you though you had had enough of all the Lovelocks, another comes along.

Go nuclear, save the planet... buy the book (that last bit was mine)

I have been erring on agreeing with Mr. Lovelock's analysis of late,
whilst wishing that such contentious, though sincerely meant as
thought-provoking, opinion pieces did not seem to always end with
"The book/TV series/movie is out now, priced £/$x, and the author
is on a tour of the planet to promote it now... but probably not on his
bike"

However, the value of blog post from those who care and know stuff
is clearly evidenced here.

When poachers turn gamekeepers. With nukes.

This issue has rumbled on so long I almost sailed past it.

Nuclear energy? Yes please...

Then I saw who the pro-nuclear advocate in question was, and that makes it worthy of note in the debate, and coming to a pragmatic opinion.

The writer is a former leader of Greenpeace and chair and chief scientist of Greenspirit Strategies

That, of course, along with the facts quoted (in this day and age, one man's fact is another's lobby-group propaganda), I leave to you.

A Mighty Wind

In light of recent discussions, I have decided to re-post to Newsnight:

Are domestic wind turbines an eco-con?

I very much appreciate these blog posts because, between the inevitable extremes of opinion, there are some smart cookies who do seem to know what they are talking about and can share some worthwhile facts.

Hence I have revisited after quite a while, as a consequence of a BBC news report this morning, the content accuracy (or at least diligence to put PR in context) of which rang a few bells in my mind.

My main concern was that the claim was made that a new windfarm would supply half of Scotland.

I raised some doubts on my blog - http://junkk.blogspot.com/2007/02/talking-heads.html - and it seems they MAY be founded, but so far those involved in the discussion would be the first to admit we don't know.

Should anyone who does revisit these pages some answers would be appreciated.

I fear that my faith in objective reporting, even my our premier national news channel, is being seriously eroded as it becomes more and more of a PR-patsy for government and other organisations who wish to be seen to be doing 'good' in pushing their agendas.

My only concern is delivering genuine enviro-ROI from initiatives that will improve my kids' futures, and not some pol's career, activist's pension plan fund or commercial interest's lobby pot.

Or, for that matter, some unconcerned journalist/editor/producer's desire just to fill a slot under the name of 'news'.

And just for fun, I have written to the editor:

More Ethical Man territory (I've posted on his piece on the matter as well), but this does extend to other issues you have raised, such as the programme's and indeed BBC's role in sharing objective information. My main area of concern is how we are being driven in the area of environmental good practice, and what I perceive as a poor level of context and objectivity on many issues that surely demand as much as reasonably possible before people commit their money, votes and kids' futures, based on what is often little more than agenda-driven, target-based, career/empire-enhancing or profit-generating PR.

From pieces on electric cars that 'don't pollute' (they do, it's just the exhaust pipe is in a different place) to a slot on wind-farm generation today that frankly didn't add up, I'd be much more inclined to enthusiastically embrace all these planet-saving initiatives if I didn't feel I was being conned, and not very well, by all those with the most to gain... in the short term. It's as shame that I feel the media I should trust most are complicit in taking me along for the ride.