Through the queens speech the coalition government announced a series of energy market reforms, in the form of the energy bill, that they hope will provide an adrenaline boost to the flagging industry, mainly in the form of complex subsidies. However, as has been apparent with most announcements regarding the energy industry from the government, there are still large areas of policy shrouded in mystery.

The system the government is trying to implement works around low-carbon electricity (from renewable or nuclear sources) can sign long-term contracts to supply at a preferential rate, so effectively legislating against carbon emissions. While this on the face of things looks like a step in the right direction the head of climate change at WWF-UK had some harsh criticism of the legislation, while saying it was a step in the right direction he indicated that it did not nearly go far enough.

One significant implication of the legislation is that it will effectively subsidise the Nuclear Industry as it is a low carbon source of electricity, which is at odds with the coalition agreement, that there would be no state subsidies for nuclear power. Incentives have been shared across, what the government has been to classify as, low-carbon industries; though surely a worry is that the renewable industry will be stifled in the UK, compared against more established technologies.

If we take a look at the German Company Strabag’s development of serialised wind turbine installations, and the speed of that development, we can see what can be achieved focus is placed on renewable energy. This goes to highlight that while the renewable industry is growing in this country at a very healthy rate more can be achieved with greater support.

The Nuclear industry by its very nature is a slow developing beast with small evolutionary design changes targeted towards safety rather than taking revolutionary design steps. This approach being taken to ensure that we have the safest plants possible, as we are dealing with radiation sources after all. If we take a look at the development on the EPR plant at Flamenville in France we can see how slow Nuclear can progress.

The government is worried, and so should we all, about the impending likelihood of black outs and, with the nuclear renaissance faltering, needed to promote growth within the energy sector. With the energy bill they hope to achieve that, unfortunately as the bill seems to be lacking in detail in some areas and over complex in others, the likelihood of success is uncertain.

The future energy balance in the UK must be made up from a mixture of renewable and nuclear in order to be anywhere near the targets set for 2050 on reducing carbon emissions and we must develop a smart grid in order to deliver electricity to where it is needed. That is why clear direction is needed from the government on such issues and while the UK may not ever be a major contributor to global nuclear technology we still have the opportunity to be world leading in renewable/clean technology .

Also posted @ therenewablefuture.

Once again it’s time to look at my five favourite engineering stories from around the internet. This week I’m pointing you to articles on building colonies in space, seventies-style, how engineers can save the British Isles from water disparity, the experience of working in Government for a sustainable energy engineer, how the film “Dr No” apparently killed nuclear’s image and, of course, to mining asteroids.

Colonies in space

If the TV shows, films and books of 50s and 60s were to be believed, by now we should be living like the Jetson’s, flying our space-cars and getting our nourishment from pills. Whilst the images on TV and in comics were fanciful, one book went out of it’s way to make a business and engineering case for the construction of orbiting colonies.

“Colonies in Space” by T. A. Heppenheimer, published in 1977, went into extraordinary detail of both the engineering and societal requirements for building space colonies, complete with fabulous period illustrations and diagrams.

This book has now been released online in its entirety on the website of the “National Space Society“. Head over there and see what the future might still look like.

Engineering can save us from drought

James Dyson argues in the Telegraph that just as the Victorians engineered their way out of the terrible problems presented by poor sanitation via the construction of the enormous sewers, we can now engineer our way out of the disparity between rainfall and consumption requirements across the UK. He goes on to add, that we should look at our water consumption and take serious steps to reduce it.

Sustainability by numbers

David MacKay’s book “Sustainable energy without the hot air” brought some much needed rationality to the renewable energy debate. Impressively and very usefully, the entire book is available free online in a variety of formats.

More recently he’s been working for the British government to advise on energy policy. In this month’s issue of the the IMechE’s Professional Engineering magazine, he discusses his experiences in working in government and how his viewpoint has changed and evolved since working there.

Dr No killed the nuclear industry’s image

The Royal Society of Chemistry have blamed the James Bond film “Dr No” for destroying the public’s previously positive image of nuclear power. In 1962. Head over to Power Engineering International where the absurdity of this statement is tackled and followed by a train of James Bond villain puns…

Mining asteroids

I couldn’t let this week’s news round-up pass without mentioning the James Bond villain-esque-meets-Jetson’s plan to mine asteroids by a billionaire. Yet like James Cameron exploring the oceans and Richard Branson blasting off on Virgin Galactic, I’m rather glad that we have billionaires who want to push the boundaries. Head on over to The Engineer magazine to read Stuart Nathan’s amusing and positive peace on the subject.

That’s your lot for this week. Let us know what you think in the comments and check back again this time next week for another news round up!

Right, I’m off to plot my path to world and galactic domination. I shall be in my space colony if anybody needs me.

After the meltdown of the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan following the earthquake last year, it wouldn’t have been all that surprising to see governments across the world scaling back their nuclear power.

The Japanese government reacted quickly, closing plants almost immediately and placing a life of 40 years on their existing power plants, which could cause power shortages as discussed on the Earth and Industry website.

Read more…

Gordon Kneale Brooke (CC Attribution-ShareAlike)

In addition to the impact on the nuclear industry, the Fukushima incident is showing how inter-connected the world’s energy systems have become.

The gas price has jumped over 10% since the earthquake, as Japan buys up Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) cargoes to enable their gas power stations to meet a greater proportion of the country’s electricity demand.  On top of the rises already seen off the back of the events in the Middle East it’s an interesting demonstration of how vulnerable our supplies are to outside influences; natural or political.

Closer to home the German Government has shut down the country’s seven oldest nuclear reactors to carry out ‘stress tests’ to increase confidence in their ability to continue operating safely.  That lost generation is being replaced by carbon-intensive coal and gas plants, in turn increasing demand for CO₂ allowances under the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme.  As a result the CO₂ price has rallied to just shy of £15/t – the highest in two years.

In the UK the gas price has had the greatest impact, leading to even the least efficient of the coal stations running before our combined cycle gas turbines (CCGTs) – bucking the trend of recent months and years.  At the time of writing the breakdown of generation by fuel type was 40% coal, 36% gas, 20% nuclear and 1.5% wind, with the remainder being covered by the interconnector to France and hydro plants¹.

Over the next two to four years a lot of that fuel flexibility will be lost as 8.4 GW of coal plants close under the Large Combustion Plant Directive².  In the same period 6.4 GW of nuclear stations will also come to the end of their lives³.

Wikipedia user Pline (CC Attribution-ShareAlike)

That gap, equivalent to just under 20% of our entire installed capacity, is currently being replaced with new CCGT stations, the result of which will be increased dependence on one fuel source – imported natural gas.

References:

With all this bad press Nuclear power’s getting recently I thought I’d write a few words, giving my opinion why people fear and hate it so much and what they’d have us generate our electricity from.

Now hands up, when I mentioned nuclear how many of you thought of that mutated fish from the Simpsons? The media through their dramatic films and inaccurate cartoons, however entertaining, have made a “nuclear accident” equal a massive mushroom cloud and the end of the world. But that’s hardly the case. This scaremongering has had knock on effects in the wake of the Fukushima incident, with various anti-nuclear groups hailing this as an example of why nuclear is evil. A handful of governments (here’s looking at you Switzerland) have also thought twice about their nuclear energy plans.

Simpson's Fish (edit: aka Blinky), from Photobucket

One of the world’s largest recorded earthquakes and a massive tsunami hit the country. The fact that the plant structures aren’t all laying in a pile on the ground is already a massive achievement for a +40 year old plant designed to withstand a earthquake ~16 times less powerful than the one last week.

Modern designs for nuclear plants and the heightened safety requirements involved can undoubtedly provide far more seismically durable plants. Plants more than capable in handling Switzerland’s aggressive earthquakes.

So ok, you win, we now can’t build nuclear plants because they might melt and kill us all. We can’t built coal, oil or gas as they’ll melt our ice caps and mean the Scots can start prodcuing wine. So we’re relying on renewables. Which is obviously good, but not exactly the balanced portfolio needed to maintain supply.

This is an open request to the News industry, please stop scaring us with your apocalyptic headlines, and try researching further than the Simpson’s repeats on ch4.