I really do not see that this contributes much except by stating the
obvious. Say goodbye to coal as fast as
possible. Until now that was not an easy
option. The advent of cold fusion based
thermal reactors in the coming months suggests that that story is about to
swiftly end. Coal plants can convert to
these thermal reactors, largely preserving the investment if not the
mines. From then on they can ship power
cheaper that was ever possible.
That is the unrecognized importance of recent developments in this type
of energy generation. It requires a
thermal plant in order for it to be used properly. Thus full roll out will be best done causing
the least disruption through the established coal burners.
Expect to hear a lot about all this beginning next year and then
getting a lot louder as the coal industry wakes up to the reality that they are
soo dead.
Advanced Power-Grid
Research Finds Low-Cost, Low-Carbon Future in Western U.S.
ScienceDaily (Apr. 3,
2012) — The least expensive way for the Western U.S. to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions enough to help prevent the worst consequences of global warming
is to replace coal with renewable and other sources of energy that may include
nuclear power, according to a new study by University of California, Berkeley,
researchers.
The experts reached this
conclusion using SWITCH, a highly detailed computer model of the electric power
grid, to study generation, transmission and storage options for the states west
of the Kansas/Colorado border. The model will be an important tool for
utilities and government planners.
"Decarbonization of the
electric power sector is critical to achieving greenhouse gas reductions that
are needed for a sustainable future," said Daniel Kammen, Distinguished
Professor of Energy in UC Berkeley's Energy and Resources Group. "To meet
these carbon goals, coal has to go away from the region."
To achieve this level of
decarbonization, policy changes are needed to cap or tax carbon emissions to
provide an incentive to move toward low-carbon electricity sources, Kammen and
the other study authors said.
While some previous studies
have emphasized the high cost of carbon taxes or caps, the new study shows that
replacing coal with more gas generation, as well as renewable sources like
wind, solar and geothermal energy, would result in only a moderate increase to
consumers in the cost of electric power -- at most, 20 percent. They estimate a
lower ratepayer cost, Kammen said, because the evolution of the electrical grid
over the next 20 years -- with coordinated construction of new power plants and
transmission lines -- would substantially reduce the actual consumer cost of
meeting carbon emission targets.
"While the carbon price
required to induce these deep carbon emission reductions is high -- between $59
and $87 per ton of CO2 emitted -- the cost of power is predicted to
increase by at most 20 percent, because the electricity system will redesign
itself around a price or cap on carbon emissions," said Kammen. "That
is a modest cost considering that the future of the planet is at stake."
Coal hazards
Burning coal, a non-renewable
resource, produces about 20 percent of the world's greenhouse gases, but also
releases harmful chemicals into the environment such as mercury, sulfur
dioxide, nitrogen oxides and sulfuric acid, responsible in some areas for acid
rain and respiratory illness.
California has few coal-fired
power plants, but gets about 20 percent of its electricity from coal-burning
plants in neighboring states. About 46 percent of the state's power comes from
gas-burning plants, 11 percent from hydroelectric, 14 percent from nuclear and
11 percent from other renewables: geothermal energy, wind and solar.
The study, scheduled to be
published in the April issue of the journal Energy Policy, highlights an
analysis using the SWITCH electricity planning model. SWITCH, which stands for
Solar, Wind, Hydro and Conventional generation and Transmission Investment,
uses unprecedented detail that includes generation, transmission and storage of
electricity. The model was developed by Matthias Fripp to study California's
renewable energy options while he was a Ph.D. student at UC Berkeley. Kammen
and his group extended the model's capabilities and used it to study Western
North America.
"We use the SWITCH model
to identify low-carbon supply options for the West, and to see how intermittent
generation may be deployed in the future," said first author James Nelson,
a UC Berkeley graduate student. "We show that it is possible to reach our
goals of reducing carbon emissions using many possible mixes of power, whether
natural gas, nuclear, solar, wind, biomass or geothermal."
"Models like this are
eagerly anticipated by many of the agencies involved in planning," Kammen
said, noting that SWITCH is a power-system model that can be fine-tuned for
many different types of studies.
Setting targets for 2030
emissions
Mandates called Renewable
Portfolio Standards (RPS) currently dominate carbon reduction policy in the
United States. These standards require that a certain fraction of electricity
generation come from renewable sources. While California has a relatively high
RPS target of 33 percent renewable sources by 2020, other Western states have
less ambitious targets. Additional policy action throughout Western North
America will be required to meet climate targets, Kammen said.
The UC Berkeley study
concluded that current RPS targets are not sufficient to put electric power
sector emissions on track to limit atmospheric levels of carbon to less than
450 ppm, a climate stabilization target recommended by the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change. That target requires carbon emissions from electricity
production in industrialized countries to drop to no more than 54 percent of
1990 emissions by 2030.
However, the study finds that
the right mix of renewable energy sources can meet climate goals given stronger
carbon policy.
Of all 50 states, California
has been the most aggressive in setting goals for reducing carbon emissions,
with a target to return to 1990 levels by 2020. The first step along the path
of changing the balance of energy sources is the establishment of a carbon
trading market in California, which will be up and running in September 2012,
said Kammen.
Coauthors of the study are
Josiah Johnston, Ana Mileva, Ian Hoffman, Autumn Petros-Good and Christian
Blanco of UC Berkeley's RAEL lab and the Energy and Resources Group; and
Matthias Fripp of the Environmental Change Group at Oxford University in the
United Kingdom.
Funding for the Energy
Policy study was provided by the National Science Foundation, the
Environmental Protection Agency, NextEra Energy Resources, the Karsten Family
Foundation, Vestas Wind LLC, the UC Berkeley Class of 1935, the CPV Consortium,
the Berkeley Nerds Fellowship and the Link Energy Fellowship.
Good post! We will be linking to this great content on our site.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the great writing.
Have a look at my web page ... moving companies california