Wave power to surf into Cornwall
September 28, 2007 at 11:29 am
There is finally something completely positive for people of the UK in the world of renewable energy sources. September 2007 marks the month that the government gave planning permission for Cornwall to host the world’s largest wave-powered energy system, capable of generating enough energy to power over 14,000 homes.
The site will sit as a ‘hub’ about ten miles off the coast of St Ives and nestle under the water’s surface, capturing the power of the strong Atlantic waves as they are propelled towards the shore. 20 machines with various turbines and generators will take only a few years to fully erect and plans have been set for the power to reach the National Grid before 2009.
The study has been commissioned by the South West of England Regional Development Agency and they estimate that around 700 jobs will be created and eventually up to £27 million added to the UK economy.
Energy Minister Mike O’Brien said: “The development of wave and tidal energy has enormous potential in the UK, and UK businesses have an opportunity to be world leaders in the field. The Wave Hub Project us an excellent example of a scheme that could bridge the chasm between research and development and full-scale production.”
The energy created will be sent from the hub down a single 33KV-30MVA cable which will be buried under the sea-bed. Then, when it reaches the coast, it will meet with a substation at Hayle which will offset the power into the existing cables.
Completely renewable and completely green, this is a very exciting project for the UK and for the South West. It will aim to set a benchmark for the rest of the world in terms of wave-power. It contributes vastly to the Kyoto Protocol agreement and will show sceptical countries such as the US where and how to move forward with energy production.
Possible downsides were feared for the tourism and fishing industries. However, the former is not being anticipated at all, as for the most part the project site will be unnoticed. The fishing community too is being liaised with throughout by the project managers and, in a strange way, it might even benefit the fishermen as the project will impose no-take areas and so improve the habitats for rare fish species.
Finally, the world famous surfing community in Cornwall don’t even seem to have any problems with the project. They were somewhat nervous to begin with but reports from a similar project in New Zealand show that the wave height will only be reduced by less than 5%. The environmental group The Surfers Against Sewage have fully endorsed the proposal. Their campaign officer Andy Cummins says “Wave hub’s government approval is good news for Cornwall and for the future of renewable energy generation in the UK. We look forward to using the same energy we use to ride waves to light up our homes as well.”
Electricity companies locking you in for a year
September 24, 2007 at 12:47 pm
Where we could once choose whether or not we wanted to switch our gas or electricity suppliers within the agreed 28 day period, it now looks likely that we will soon be tied down to a year-long contract like we are currently all enjoying with the mobile phone networks.
In August 2007, the industry’s regulator Ofgem announced that the rules and regulations concerning energy customers being able to change their supplier after a month will be loosened. Ofgem revealed that roughly 700,000 customer accounts move from one supplier to another each month in the hunt for a better deal as the privatised energy world becomes even more cut-throat.
Ofgem’s reasons for scrapping this long-standing rule are not surprisingly linked to environmental issues and a desire to help promote a greener UK. They claim that by allowing suppliers this safer option they will be given more incentive to provide customers with energy saving equipment and tariffs.
It didn’t take long for some energy companies to be the first out of the blocks with this new rule. One of the smaller and less known suppliers Utilitia now offers customers the choice to sign up to a one year contract. They then grant them a free survey accessing how they can make their home greener. The tariffs are cheaper and there is no charge for leaving within the year but you don’t receive the annual discount.
British Gas is the first of the larger suppliers to utilise the new rule. They are offering new customers free gas for an entire year worth up to £800 if they purchase a new boiler from them and sign up for a year.
Spokeswomen for British Gas Claire Monaghan said: “When you buy an energy-efficient boiler from us, we’re offering a year’s free gas to the value of £800. If you move home or change supplier during the year, you will be paid £305 as a one off payment.”
The worry for some consumer watchdogs is that these energy companies are jumping on the band-wagon and using environmentally-friendly incentives as a way of enticing customers to their products and then, with the new rules such as this, trapping them for a year. When energy became privatised this sort of war was inevitable but how long will it be before we are all stuck with the one supplier and severely punished if we are less than satisfied with them and want to leave?
On this matter, Mark Todd from energyhelpline.com said, “The emergence of lock-in deals is a worrying sign for consumers. They will need to beware of onerous conditions which could tie them into uncompetitive deals, especially in the coming winter months, which are expected to bring further volatility on the wholesale markets.”
Government urged to regulate green energy
September 21, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Consumer protection group, energywatch, this week called for tighter regulation of so-called “green energy tariffs”. Together
with the National Consumer Council (NCC), it asked the Government to ensure consumers were provided with the full facts about the tariffs. There are concerns that many products currently appear greener than they are because energy companies “double count” their carbon off-setting
measures.
Green energy tariffs began to appear in the 1990s, driven as much by The Renewables Obligation (RO) which came into force in April 2002, as consumer demand. The legislation required a percentage of energy to be bought from renewable sources. By 2001 uptake of domestic green energy tariffs was substantial, with Number 10, Downing Street among the UKs eco-friendly electricity households. By 2007, 11 energy companies were offering one or more green tariffs. With so many products on the market, energywatch is concerned about consumer confusion, and the variable premiums which customers are being charged for greener energy.
Jonathan Stearn, Head of Campaigns at energywatch, said:
“Low levels of trust and confusion are holding the green energy market back. Consumers need verified information so they can choose with confidence the green
tariffs that make a difference by reducing carbon emissions. Our proposals would ensure that tariffs are transparent, offer additional environmental
benefits and are independently verified.”
Signing up to a green tariff has no effect on the type of electricity being supplied to your home. It is the supplier who commits to buying in a greater proportion of energy from renewable sources, cutting the quota bought from traditional sources such as coal-fired power stations. This greener energy comes at a price, which is passed on to the consumer. London Electricity’s Green Tariff, for example, costs an extra 0.4p per unit, and the BBC recently reported that British Gas customers would need to find an extra £84 per year to meet the cost of their energy bill if they switched to a green tariff.
Not all green tariffs are the same. Companies buying in greener energy, as described above, can describe their tariffs as “green source”. “Green fund” and “carbon offset” tariffs may also be classified as green, but don’t amount to the same thing. These involve the supplier setting aside
money for green energy projects and paying to offset carbon emissions. Energywatch believes there is a need for a green energy accreditation scheme. This would give consumers more information about the tariffs, and ensure their green credentials were verified. Evidence of reduced carbon emissions, backed by solid scientific tests would be required.
Furthermore, the accreditation scheme would stop “double counting” of eco-friendly energy. Currently energy companies may appear greener than they are, thanks to regulatory loopholes which allow “greenness” to be measured more than once. The NCC believes tariffs should be ranked according to the amount of carbon dioxide produced to supply the electricity, to help make greener energy choices less of a headache for consumers. Currently, only around 1% of energy
consumers have gone green, though two-thirds of the UK population would like to, according to NCC research.
If you are confused about green energy, check out the energywatch Green Tariff Guide. Regularly updated, the guide will help you separate the truly eco-friendly from the misleading.
Would a mass switch-off really work?
September 17, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Many of those concerned for the environment have always maintained that something simple like a mass switch-off for a few minutes is all it would take to make a big difference. Indeed, both Live Earth and BBC had originally planned such a switch-off on a designated awareness day. Although these have since been cancelled, it is still worth knowing why a mass switch-off would not be as easy as previously maintained.
Although switching off lights and appliances for a short while sounds like a hugely dramatic and exciting gesture to show that we all care about the planet, the National Grid has warned that that the reality would be quite different. They explain that the sudden shift into unpredictable energy demand across the country could actually yield serious problems. For example, some people could lose their electricity long-term and it could even be that we end up emitting more carbon dioxide and not less. Though no one knows for sure what would happen in a mass cut-off, there have been numerous large-scale surges in the past that resulted in undesirable effects.
Electricity supply, says a spokesman from the National Grid, isn’t an easy thing to control. One faces a constant challenge trying to predict how much electricity will be used at certain times. For example, during a break in a hugely popular football match one- third of the population simultaneously click the kettle on in the kitchen to make themselves a cup of tea. The suppliers must be prepared for this “TV pick-up.”
Similarly, any other occasions such as major episodes of soaps and royal weddings must be accounted for and accurate predictions made so that enough energy is supplied – not too little and not too much, all at the same frequency of 50hz. It is like keeping a car at the same speed whilst going up and down different hills.
As Alan Smart, an energy operations manager for National Grid explains: “We can’t store electricity in any great quantity, so we have to forecast second by second, minute by minute.” Incredibly, there are even employees looking at the TV schedules in anticipation of future energy demands, and they need a couple of minutes notice each time before they work out what should happen to the energy output.
There are contingency measures put in place, but the issue could become very complicated if there was a mass switch-off. There haven’t been many examples in the past of such a low demand that is suddenly triggered by TV programmes, except cases like the two minutes’ silence on Remembrance Sunday, and so any prediction would falter. No one, says Smart, would be able to hypothesise how many people would take part in such a new kind of thing as a mass switch-off. It could be that everyone suddenly has a burst of passion for the environment or only a few people do, we just do not know.
If the supplier estimates that too many people will take part, then much energy will be wasted, and if it is estimated that too few will take part then there could be a loss of supply. What could ultimately end up happening, therefore, is that the measure could ironically result in more damage to the environment than usual.
A mass switch-off, though it sounds like a good plan, seems to have too many problems to be feasible right now. The best that can happen, and indeed what has been compromised on, is that viewers conserve energy in the 24 hours before an awareness programme so that the supplier has enough time and an opportunity to analyse the results for future reference.
Many wind farms not economically viable
September 11, 2007 at 9:53 am
Few would argue with the new government incentives to subsidise wind farms across the country. However, a new study has shown that hundreds of millions of pounds are actually going to waste because many wind farms are being constructed in areas where there is in fact no wind.
The results come from from the World Renewable Energy Network whose spokesman Michael Jefferson has said that many wind farms across England, Wales and Scotland are simply not worth the effort of constructing them as they generate very little electricity. This may come as somewhat of an embarrassment after all the effort the government has put in, especially with its aim of reaching the EU target, which states that 20% of all energy must be produced by renewable sources by 2020.
However, despite the seemingly conclusive results of the new study, the response has been more controversial. For example, the British Wind Energy Association has said that the claims are “nonsense”, as the amount of money is not actually subsidising the building of plants but only the units of electricity to the National Grid. Therefore, the government is not actually involved in the production of the so-called useless plants but only in what is used, and hence is not wasting money.
Furthermore, such research is often carried out before wind farms are constructed and pre-supposes incredible ignorance on the part of the authorities. As Chief Executive Maria McCaffery says: “Nobody in their right mind, not a developer and not the government, would support the building of a wind farm where the wind speeds are not high enough to generate a viable amount of electricity.”
It seems clear that, if wind farms have indeed been constructed in places where there is little wind, there has been a communication breakdown somewhere along the line but it is not obvious who is to blame. Some speculate that, because of the increasing pressure the government is facing to meet its target, it is being more careless in choosing where to place wind farms. Similarly, some companies have exaggerated the figures in their predictions of the amount of energy that plants could produce. The big problem is that the wind is so volatile in Britain that it is very difficult to be able to predict what wind will be like in different parts of the country.
Engineering consultant Jim Oswold believes that this is indeed a serious issue and that, if wind farms are going to be more popular in the coming years, the system needs to be redesigned. He argues that over a 20-hour period you can go from almost 100% wind output to 20%, the latter being too inefficient to be economically viable. All in all, though wind farms have been marketed as an incredibly efficient form of renewable energy, the sad fact is they are still producing less than 0.5% of our electricity needs – a long long way off the government’s target. The system needs to be given more thought before we get our hopes up too high.
A car with a battery the size of a stamp
September 5, 2007 at 10:26 am
A New York based science institute has created a battery that has enough energy (2.5 volts) to power a small light bulb is the same thickness as a piece of paper. Like a standard battery, the ‘stamp-size’ battery stores energy but, instead of containing a series of individual components, it integrates them all into one area which means it s actually more efficient.
Professor Robert Linhardt, who was spearheaded the research, said: “They are ultimately easier to manufacture, more environmentally friendly and usable in a wide range of devices.” The Professor’s hopes are that the invention will one day be efficient enough to power a car. It’s a simple technique whereby doubling up the layers of the paper will give double the amount of power. This could be achieved through coiling the paper or through increasing the size.
The process of production involves ‘nanotubes’, which are carbon atoms wrapped into a tube shape of a tiny size, being dissolved into a liquid mixture of plant cellulose and chloride, forming a pure ionic liquid. These carbon nanotubes are very expensive and for the production to be worthwhile they must test the device much further before mass production. However, the seed has been sown for further advancement.
The paper-battery can work in temperatures from -75 – 150 degrees and are flexible, durable and 90% cellulose. It is quite possible that the actual structure of an appliance could one day also be the power source. Mobile phones, remote controls, laptops and perhaps even furniture and clothing could one day be made from this charged material.
One of the more intriguing uses for the battery could be within the human body. The material is predominantly made from carbon and paper and therefore totally safe within the body, unlike current batteries which are all toxic. Blood, sweat or urine can then serve as an electrolyte and power such devices as a heart pacemaker.
Unconventional batteries are not a new thing to the world. A battery cell could be made from a number of materials. Tricks like making a digital clock or a light bulb shine using only a potato, lemon or a coin are popular ones with children but will never generate enough voltage to work on a larger scale. The paper battery, on the other hand though, has great potential for a great number of possibilities and could one day be as integral to our lives as the batteries we all currently use.
