I did not know about this when I posted that.Grumble wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 10:38 pmThat’s not storage so much as production. For it to be useful to the UK, in this hypothetical scenario, we’d need to add a TWh or so of capacity that we could use in a day or two and which would be easily replenished. That might not be that big of a challenge, I don’t know. Does Norway export a lot of hydro power currently?bmforre wrote: ↑Tue Nov 19, 2019 9:18 pmLatest first: We don't pump hydro in Norway, water rains down from above and is caught in our large reservoirs. From whence: dispatched.
Storage capacity in this country. According to https://energifaktanorge.no/norsk-energ ... rsyningen/, translated and commented by me:
"Normal year" production: 141 TWh. Trend: Increasing with climate change at present.
Storage capacity ca. 70% of yearly consumption.
That's ca 100 TWh.
While you statein Norway we do have 100 times that.... I don’t think we’ll get 1 TWh of storage ...
The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-uk ... ls-in-2019
A rise in wind farm capacity was offset by the outages of two nuclear plants so total low carbon energy didn’t increase much last year. A drop in total demand (yay for LED lightbulbs) was a big contributor to reduced fossil fuel usage and hence a higher percentage of low carbon electricity in the mix. They project an increase in demand in the future due to electrification of heating and transport, so new nuclear or an acceleration of more renewables + storage will be required.
A rise in wind farm capacity was offset by the outages of two nuclear plants so total low carbon energy didn’t increase much last year. A drop in total demand (yay for LED lightbulbs) was a big contributor to reduced fossil fuel usage and hence a higher percentage of low carbon electricity in the mix. They project an increase in demand in the future due to electrification of heating and transport, so new nuclear or an acceleration of more renewables + storage will be required.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
-
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1534
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:22 pm
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Trying to find out if correct, but I was talking to someone the other day who reckoned that gas-boilers were to be banned from new-build housing from 2025. Now whether that is a) correct and b) will have that much of an effect (as it'll be a tiny fraction of a large housing market) are yet to be determined.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
2025 was in the manifestos of certain parties that failed to win the General Election. The housing companies did not like it. The housing companies have close links to the political party that won the General Election.
It would have a big effect - something like 5 million homes by 2050. Each 5 years it's delayed means another 1 million homes that will need an expensive refit.
It would have a big effect - something like 5 million homes by 2050. Each 5 years it's delayed means another 1 million homes that will need an expensive refit.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Trump to shut down more coal than Obama
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 82456.html
Of course it’s not actually him, it’s the economic reality that gas is cheaper than coal, with the added disruption from renewables too. Even Trump can’t fight economics.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl ... 82456.html
Of course it’s not actually him, it’s the economic reality that gas is cheaper than coal, with the added disruption from renewables too. Even Trump can’t fight economics.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Disinvestment in coal just took a huge leap forward. Black Rock is is going to disinvest in firms that have over 25% of their revenue in coal. An open letter from their CEO lays out the reasoning. Basically climate risk is financial risk and it's their fiduciary duty to reduce that.
They manage seven trillion dollars in assets so the impact should be significant and drive up the cost of capital for the more polluting industries, it's also recognition, in capitalist terms, that something needs to be done about anthropogenic climate change. With any luck, more will pile in.
If only they'd done this a decade or three ago.
They manage seven trillion dollars in assets so the impact should be significant and drive up the cost of capital for the more polluting industries, it's also recognition, in capitalist terms, that something needs to be done about anthropogenic climate change. With any luck, more will pile in.
If only they'd done this a decade or three ago.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Ultimately, they go with the economics, not the science. Investment in coal was profitable 3 decades ago, and probably 1 decade ago. It's only the last 5 years that it's become clearer and clearer that new investment would be a dud. It's good evidence of the theory that capitalism is too slow to adjust capital allocation in a changing world, but only 5 years too slow.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
My gas boiler is on the way out. It is 25 years old and a new one will be more efficient, but I’m a bit sad that I’m replacing it with another gas boiler. I simply haven’t got the capital to buy a greener more efficient system. If I have to take a loan out to pay for it then there is no financial incentive for me to spend 3x the amount even if it will be cheaper in the long run in running costs, thinking of solar hot water.
I’ve also looked into getting solar PV and air source heat pumps, I’d need a spare £15-20k to be able to do that and I might see a benefit financially in about 15 years. A new gas boiler costs £2k.
I’ve also looked into getting solar PV and air source heat pumps, I’d need a spare £15-20k to be able to do that and I might see a benefit financially in about 15 years. A new gas boiler costs £2k.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
- Matatouille
- Fuzzable
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:26 pm
- Location: UK
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
In the UK? Have you looked into the Renewable Heat Incentive? Its for retrofits/replacements and when I was looking at it for a house I was thinking of buying and doing an eco-renovation on, the generosity of the scheme went a long way to offsetting the loan (specifically in my case extra mortgage value) required. Wouldn't have paid the whole cost of the ground sourced heat pump system I was thinkiing of, but the operational savings would have done the rest over a reasonable period.Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 11:18 amMy gas boiler is on the way out. It is 25 years old and a new one will be more efficient, but I’m a bit sad that I’m replacing it with another gas boiler. I simply haven’t got the capital to buy a greener more efficient system. If I have to take a loan out to pay for it then there is no financial incentive for me to spend 3x the amount even if it will be cheaper in the long run in running costs, thinking of solar hot water.
I’ve also looked into getting solar PV and air source heat pumps, I’d need a spare £15-20k to be able to do that and I might see a benefit financially in about 15 years. A new gas boiler costs £2k.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
I have. If the renewable heat incentive is going to drive uptake then it needs to be applied before purchase, not over seven years after the purchase! That puts the onus on me to raise the money in the first place, and I don’t see why I should. Why doesn’t it work like the electric car incentive?Matatouille wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 12:24 pmIn the UK? Have you looked into the Renewable Heat Incentive? Its for retrofits/replacements and when I was looking at it for a house I was thinking of buying and doing an eco-renovation on, the generosity of the scheme went a long way to offsetting the loan (specifically in my case extra mortgage value) required. Wouldn't have paid the whole cost of the ground sourced heat pump system I was thinkiing of, but the operational savings would have done the rest over a reasonable period.Grumble wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2020 11:18 amMy gas boiler is on the way out. It is 25 years old and a new one will be more efficient, but I’m a bit sad that I’m replacing it with another gas boiler. I simply haven’t got the capital to buy a greener more efficient system. If I have to take a loan out to pay for it then there is no financial incentive for me to spend 3x the amount even if it will be cheaper in the long run in running costs, thinking of solar hot water.
I’ve also looked into getting solar PV and air source heat pumps, I’d need a spare £15-20k to be able to do that and I might see a benefit financially in about 15 years. A new gas boiler costs £2k.
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
- Matatouille
- Fuzzable
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:26 pm
- Location: UK
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Because that would make it work for most people! Can't be hqaving that!
I think this boils down to the Treasury's general reluctance for givaways that increase the value of poeple's assets, in this case homes. Whilst I understand the general sentiment that this sort of investment in an ideal world shouldn't be from the government as it just increases the gap between haves and have nots, they're going to have to get off this high horse when it comes to house efficiency improvements and heating carbon elimination if we want to get anywhere very fast.
A decent, wide ranging dwelling improvement scheme where more homes are eligible for improvement grants than not ought not affect asset values too much over the medium-long term as you'd be lifting the bulk of the housing stock, rather than individual dwellings relative to their neighbours.
EDIT: But that would be mad, wouldn't it?
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Last time I tried working out the overall CO2 efficiency of heat pumps given the UK energy supply mix, I think I concluded it was a bit doubtful whether they really made sense here - by the time you’ve generated and transmitted the electricity to run one you’ve lost a lot of the energy you’re regaining, while a modern gas boiler is 90-something per cent efficient. This may have changed of course (or I may even have been wrong in the first place).
If you want to cut your CO2 footprint without worrying too much about payback then I think solar thermal is still worth doing - but as I think I’ve said here before you’d achieve more by investing the money in a solar or other renewable scheme somewhere sunnier or windier.
Better insulation and draughtproofing is also cost-effective although you need to make sure you don’t create condensation issues. You can get ventilation systems with heat recovery which might be an option. I’ve also seen heat exchangers for the shower drain and cold water supply which I thought was a nifty idea.
If you want to cut your CO2 footprint without worrying too much about payback then I think solar thermal is still worth doing - but as I think I’ve said here before you’d achieve more by investing the money in a solar or other renewable scheme somewhere sunnier or windier.
Better insulation and draughtproofing is also cost-effective although you need to make sure you don’t create condensation issues. You can get ventilation systems with heat recovery which might be an option. I’ve also seen heat exchangers for the shower drain and cold water supply which I thought was a nifty idea.
Move-a… side, and let the mango through… let the mango through
- Matatouille
- Fuzzable
- Posts: 323
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 5:26 pm
- Location: UK
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
In my case when I was looking at this it was in the context of a holistic eco renovation project. Upgrading the windows, airtighting, and insulation, coupled with a Mechanical Ventillation with Heat Recovery unit to avoid the damp issues. Once that was done, the MVHR made sense as the thermal energy required would have been reduced considerably. Yes solar thermal and outflow heat exchangers were also in the plan. Shame about the structural issues the house had that were way past my risk threshold to take on .nekomatic wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:25 pmLast time I tried working out the overall CO2 efficiency of heat pumps given the UK energy supply mix, I think I concluded it was a bit doubtful whether they really made sense here - by the time you’ve generated and transmitted the electricity to run one you’ve lost a lot of the energy you’re regaining, while a modern gas boiler is 90-something per cent efficient. This may have changed of course (or I may even have been wrong in the first place).
If you want to cut your CO2 footprint without worrying too much about payback then I think solar thermal is still worth doing - but as I think I’ve said here before you’d achieve more by investing the money in a solar or other renewable scheme somewhere sunnier or windier.
Better insulation and draughtproofing is also cost-effective although you need to make sure you don’t create condensation issues. You can get ventilation systems with heat recovery which might be an option. I’ve also seen heat exchangers for the shower drain and cold water supply which I thought was a nifty idea.
In the UK, you're right that heat pumps aren't exceptional, and per unit enmergy aren't an automatic win over Gas. But coupled with a green electricity supplier (I know, its a lot more complicated than that) it removes most of the carbon from your space heating, which is a goal for many people.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Looking around here, ground source heat pumps aren't actually that expensive, although I need to get a quote on one at some point. Some of that is because our bedrock is shallow and predictable, and there's some new techniques with drilling on domestic scales. And with our temperature range, they make an awful lot of sense - much better to draw heat from 10 C in a -10 C winter, and dump it to 10 C in a 35 C summer than try to exchange heat to and from air.Matatouille wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:58 pmIn my case when I was looking at this it was in the context of a holistic eco renovation project. Upgrading the windows, airtighting, and insulation, coupled with a Mechanical Ventillation with Heat Recovery unit to avoid the damp issues. Once that was done, the MVHR made sense as the thermal energy required would have been reduced considerably. Yes solar thermal and outflow heat exchangers were also in the plan. Shame about the structural issues the house had that were way past my risk threshold to take on .nekomatic wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:25 pmLast time I tried working out the overall CO2 efficiency of heat pumps given the UK energy supply mix, I think I concluded it was a bit doubtful whether they really made sense here - by the time you’ve generated and transmitted the electricity to run one you’ve lost a lot of the energy you’re regaining, while a modern gas boiler is 90-something per cent efficient. This may have changed of course (or I may even have been wrong in the first place).
If you want to cut your CO2 footprint without worrying too much about payback then I think solar thermal is still worth doing - but as I think I’ve said here before you’d achieve more by investing the money in a solar or other renewable scheme somewhere sunnier or windier.
Better insulation and draughtproofing is also cost-effective although you need to make sure you don’t create condensation issues. You can get ventilation systems with heat recovery which might be an option. I’ve also seen heat exchangers for the shower drain and cold water supply which I thought was a nifty idea.
In the UK, you're right that heat pumps aren't exceptional, and per unit enmergy aren't an automatic win over Gas. But coupled with a green electricity supplier (I know, its a lot more complicated than that) it removes most of the carbon from your space heating, which is a goal for many people.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Meanwhile in other decarbonisation news, a Norwegian ship is going to test a 2 GW ammonia fuel cell as its power plant
Move-a… side, and let the mango through… let the mango through
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Er, 2 MW, it says. (which is still 2,600 HP)nekomatic wrote: ↑Fri Jan 31, 2020 4:06 pmMeanwhile in other decarbonisation news, a Norwegian ship is going to test a 2 GW ammonia fuel cell as its power plant
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Er yeah, that too
Move-a… side, and let the mango through… let the mango through
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Scaling up might not be easy. How hot do ammonia fuel cells run?
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Among other advantages, the north west is more eco-friendly than Yorkshire. Also Liverpool (and North Wales) is an environmental disaster. According to the National Grid.
- Attachments
-
- 8A31C886-C04E-4648-8E83-F1EE8C362918.jpeg (650.86 KiB) Viewed 5803 times
where once I used to scintillate
now I sin till ten past three
now I sin till ten past three
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Meanwhile
https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2 ... d-coating/
Panasonic manages 16% efficiency with inkjet-printed perovskite solar cells - which has the potential to be very interesting.
https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2 ... d-coating/
Panasonic manages 16% efficiency with inkjet-printed perovskite solar cells - which has the potential to be very interesting.
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Ooooh, freaking awesome. A major problem with perovskite cells was that they aren’t very durable. No mention if they have overcome that.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
There was another story about increasing the stability of perovskite cells - which I can't find.
Meanwhile, this might be an attractive model for getting round range anxiety:
https://www.eenewspower.com/news/blende ... _id=125426
A 600-mile range from a hydrogen fuel cell and a lithium ion battery pack, together with rolling out 700 hydrogen filling stations (across the US, so presumably most would still need the battery until the infrastructure catches up).
Have you considered stupidity as an explanation
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Hmmm. So an BEV and a H2 vehicle mixed with a super capacitor all in on car. That’s going not to be cheap. Also, the filling stations are “planned”.jimbob wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2020 7:08 pmThere was another story about increasing the stability of perovskite cells - which I can't find.
Meanwhile, this might be an attractive model for getting round range anxiety:
https://www.eenewspower.com/news/blende ... _id=125426
A 600-mile range from a hydrogen fuel cell and a lithium ion battery pack, together with rolling out 700 hydrogen filling stations (across the US, so presumably most would still need the battery until the infrastructure catches up).
I totally don’t believe that H2 will be a thing for most transport. The H2 (which is just an energy store) will have to be generated by electrolysis, and round trip efficiencies are far worst than with a battery. CBA to dig out the figures again, but with current tech, something like twice the electricity needs to be generated for a H2 vehicle per mile over a BEV. Theorical peak is somewhere around 40% worse. Combined with a lack of distribution infrastructure, the difficulty in transporting it and the pain in a butt that are H2 high pressure storage tanks, it’s just too painful, inefficient and expensive.
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
Petrol, diesel, ethanol all work for cars/trucks because they are liquids at normal atmospheric temperature. Liquids allow for a fast mass transfer and are relatively easy to deal with, meaning you can fill the car/truck in a couple of minutes.bjn wrote: ↑Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:12 pmI totally don’t believe that H2 will be a thing for most transport. The H2 (which is just an energy store) will have to be generated by electrolysis, and round trip efficiencies are far worst than with a battery. CBA to dig out the figures again, but with current tech, something like twice the electricity needs to be generated for a H2 vehicle per mile over a BEV. Theorical peak is somewhere around 40% worse. Combined with a lack of distribution infrastructure, the difficulty in transporting it and the pain in a butt that are H2 high pressure storage tanks, it’s just too painful, inefficient and expensive.
LPG causes issues at times because it is pressurised. You need to know how to connect the (relatively low) pressure hose to your car. But as a pressurised liquid it still allows fast filling.
H2 will be a gas at any temperature humans can stand and the mass transfer of gas is relatively slow. It needs pretty massive pressures and/or low temperatures to make it a liquid. Unless a truly fool-proof method of connecting the filling station hose to the vehicle is produced, I can foresee multiple accidents within weeks of the roll-out of hydrogen filling stations. And remember, fools are ingenious, so they'll find work-arounds for fool-proof systems.
"My interest is in the future, because I'm going to spend the rest of my life there"
Re: The Death Of Fossil Fuels
There's already loads of hydrogen fuel stations in Japan, South Korea, Denmark, Germany, Finland and California, among other places. There have been stations in the UK since 2011.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_station
Consumer hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have been in the roads for most of a decade.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_station
Consumer hydrogen fuel cell vehicles have been in the roads for most of a decade.