The money will help to further develop the wave energy device Inverness-based AWS Ocean Energy, has received additional funding to develop its new wave energy system.
The Highlands company and its project partner, the University of Strathclyde, have received £350,000 from the Technology Strategy Board, to promote and support the system.
The investment will be used to develop their AWS-III device.
The funding is part of a £7m package awarded to nine wave and tidal projects in the UK.
The AWS-III, is a ring-shaped multi-cell surface-floating wave power system and is the result of almost two years of intensive research and development work.
Related stories
Forgotten wave power idea returns
New wave power prototype unveiled
The projects are aimed at driving down the cost of energy while improving the reliability and performance of wave and tidal power.
Simon Grey, chief executive of AWS Ocean Energy, said: "This latest funding is very welcome as we continue to develop our AWS-III wave energy device.
"Our trials on Loch Ness will restart in September for a six-week period and thereafter a detailed assessment of the trial results will be undertaken before we start building and then deploy a full-scale version of one of the wave absorption cells."
Iain Gray, chief executive of the Technology Strategy Board, said: "The UK is well placed to exploit wave and tidal stream energy resources with all of the coastline that we have, and it is expected this kind of technology will be an important part of the renewable energy mix needed in the future."
Elaine Hanton, joint head of Energy at Highlands and Islands Enterprise said: "The Highlands and Islands of Scotland are uniquely placed to support the growing marine energy sector."
A single utility-scale AWS-III, measuring about 60m in diameter, will be capable of generating up to 2.5 MW of continuous power.
Sunday, 25 July 2010
Sun Fab is Dead, Long Live Photovoltaic Power
July 22, 2010
Analysis by: Mark Burger
Analysis of: Applied Materials stops selling ‘SunFab’ thin-film lines: focus on c-Si solar and LED technology
Published at: www.pv-tech.org
Summary
The long expected demise of Applied Materials SunFab line is a setback for the company, the buyers of the manufacturing system and the bankability of some systems. But it is far from the end of the world for the technology, even amorphous silicon, presently stuck between more efficient crystalline and other thin films. It is a demonstration of the viability of the PV industry that it can shake off loss without much impact.
Analysis
The announcement by Applied Materials, Inc that they were ending their amorphous silicon turnkey production manufacturing line Sun Fab came as no great surprise to the PV industry. For a long time it was considered by analysts as too inefficient a technology (single junction that could build barely 6% efficient modules) and very expensive.The decision is a major blow to Applied Materials, more perhaps from a reputation rather than an intrinsic standpoint, and could be disastrous for the twelve or so purchasers of the SunFab systems. Some of the output of these a-Si systems could face resistance in underwriting. However, had something like this happen a decade ago, it could have cast a major cloud over the photovoltaic industry that was more than an order of magnitude smaller. Now, the setback is a relative bump on the road.The SunFab production lines capacity are only a few percent of the total industry output. The loss will easily be made up for by crystalline and more efficient thin film operations. Applied Materials will go back to crystalline and LED technology and remain in the PV game.The photovoltaic industry will have more crashes and burns as promising but expensive and unable to scale up products fall by the wayside. But that is actually the good thing about PV, that there are many variations to the technology and many business models. When the market allows for individual successes and failures, good things happen.
Analysis by: Mark Burger
Analysis of: Applied Materials stops selling ‘SunFab’ thin-film lines: focus on c-Si solar and LED technology
Published at: www.pv-tech.org
Summary
The long expected demise of Applied Materials SunFab line is a setback for the company, the buyers of the manufacturing system and the bankability of some systems. But it is far from the end of the world for the technology, even amorphous silicon, presently stuck between more efficient crystalline and other thin films. It is a demonstration of the viability of the PV industry that it can shake off loss without much impact.
Analysis
The announcement by Applied Materials, Inc that they were ending their amorphous silicon turnkey production manufacturing line Sun Fab came as no great surprise to the PV industry. For a long time it was considered by analysts as too inefficient a technology (single junction that could build barely 6% efficient modules) and very expensive.The decision is a major blow to Applied Materials, more perhaps from a reputation rather than an intrinsic standpoint, and could be disastrous for the twelve or so purchasers of the SunFab systems. Some of the output of these a-Si systems could face resistance in underwriting. However, had something like this happen a decade ago, it could have cast a major cloud over the photovoltaic industry that was more than an order of magnitude smaller. Now, the setback is a relative bump on the road.The SunFab production lines capacity are only a few percent of the total industry output. The loss will easily be made up for by crystalline and more efficient thin film operations. Applied Materials will go back to crystalline and LED technology and remain in the PV game.The photovoltaic industry will have more crashes and burns as promising but expensive and unable to scale up products fall by the wayside. But that is actually the good thing about PV, that there are many variations to the technology and many business models. When the market allows for individual successes and failures, good things happen.
Sacked workers to open new wind turbine factory
King Mohammed VI og Morocco inaugurated this 250 mln euro ($300 mln) wind farm near Tangiers on June 28. British workers who took part in an occupation of a wind turbine factory which closed with the loss of hundreds of jobs, are to open their own business making turbines just yards from the site of their former employers. AFP - Workers who lost their jobs when an Isle of Wight wind turbine factory closed down plan to open their own turbine plant on the same industrial estate as the former business.
More than 400 workers became redundant when Danish wind power giant Vestas shut its Isle of Wight factory last year, sparking an 18-day sit-in at the factory in Newport.
The new company, Sureblades, will start producing micro wind turbine blades in September and will employ a number of ex-Vestas workers, according to founder Sean McDonagh, who was one of the protest's leaders.
A wind energy company in Ireland has placed the first order and McDonagh said he hopes to employ more than 40 workers within two years.
"It has been hard work but I always knew it was the right thing to do because it was crazy to lose jobs in the renewable energy industry," he said.
Some Vestas employees are still out of work and others have taken on short-contract jobs, McDonagh said, noting that unemployment on the Isle of Wight is over 3,500 but there are fewer than 200 job vacancies on the island.
More than 400 workers became redundant when Danish wind power giant Vestas shut its Isle of Wight factory last year, sparking an 18-day sit-in at the factory in Newport.
The new company, Sureblades, will start producing micro wind turbine blades in September and will employ a number of ex-Vestas workers, according to founder Sean McDonagh, who was one of the protest's leaders.
A wind energy company in Ireland has placed the first order and McDonagh said he hopes to employ more than 40 workers within two years.
"It has been hard work but I always knew it was the right thing to do because it was crazy to lose jobs in the renewable energy industry," he said.
Some Vestas employees are still out of work and others have taken on short-contract jobs, McDonagh said, noting that unemployment on the Isle of Wight is over 3,500 but there are fewer than 200 job vacancies on the island.
How to get to a zero-carbon economy
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Steven Pearlstein's column on climate policy and energy innovation ["Can regulation beget innovation?," Economy and Business, July 16] was half-right. Tighter environmental regulations have driven innovation while cleaning up smog-causing emissions from cars and power plants. But Mr. Pearlstein was wrong to suggest that merely pricing carbon will produce the low-carbon technologies we need.
Initial carbon prices will be very modest, while most forms of advanced carbon-free energy will be expensive. Carbon prices, consequently, will drive some additional demand for wind power and efficiency improvements -- and a lot of switching from coal to natural gas.
Deeper emissions reductions, however, will require development of technologies that won't meet foreseeable carbon prices; these include sequestration of coal's carbon dioxide emissions, improved storage of renewable energy, offshore wind power and, possibly, atmospheric carbon capture.
With or without carbon pricing, more direct government actions will be needed to spur development of low-carbon technologies, such as aggressive procurement of advanced energy technologies to catalyze markets, sponsorship of first-of-kind commercial demonstration projects for new technology, and setting carbon performance standards for power plants.
Getting to a zero-carbon economic system by 2050 will be a much heavier lift than previously thought. It's time to start.
Armond Cohen and Daniel Sarewitz,
Washington
Armond Cohen is executive director of the Clean Air Task Force, a national environmental group, and Dan Sarewitz is co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University.
Steven Pearlstein's column on climate policy and energy innovation ["Can regulation beget innovation?," Economy and Business, July 16] was half-right. Tighter environmental regulations have driven innovation while cleaning up smog-causing emissions from cars and power plants. But Mr. Pearlstein was wrong to suggest that merely pricing carbon will produce the low-carbon technologies we need.
Initial carbon prices will be very modest, while most forms of advanced carbon-free energy will be expensive. Carbon prices, consequently, will drive some additional demand for wind power and efficiency improvements -- and a lot of switching from coal to natural gas.
Deeper emissions reductions, however, will require development of technologies that won't meet foreseeable carbon prices; these include sequestration of coal's carbon dioxide emissions, improved storage of renewable energy, offshore wind power and, possibly, atmospheric carbon capture.
With or without carbon pricing, more direct government actions will be needed to spur development of low-carbon technologies, such as aggressive procurement of advanced energy technologies to catalyze markets, sponsorship of first-of-kind commercial demonstration projects for new technology, and setting carbon performance standards for power plants.
Getting to a zero-carbon economic system by 2050 will be a much heavier lift than previously thought. It's time to start.
Armond Cohen and Daniel Sarewitz,
Washington
Armond Cohen is executive director of the Clean Air Task Force, a national environmental group, and Dan Sarewitz is co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University.
Carbon capture not right for UK, claims Green Party
24 July 2010
Renewable energy could be more beneficial to the UK than carbon capture and storage technology.
This is the view of a spokesman from the Green Party, who has called for more emphasis to be put on offshore wind, among other energy sectors.
The representative cited Denmark's success story with renewable energy: "If we generated the same proportion of our electricity from wind farms as Denmark does, and at the rate of growth Denmark has achieved, we'd create about 200,000 jobs by 2020."
His comments follow a report from the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), which advised the government to protect funding for low-carbon technologies.
According to the CCC, the UK should focus its funding and support on a range of low-carbon sectors, including both carbon capture and storage and renewable energy from offshore wind and marine sources.
The government has promised to deliver a Green Investment Bank in order to supply much of the funding required to support new sustainable technologies.
Posted by Mark Stephens
Sign up for regular email updates to help you save money and energy
For more information please see:
Committee on Climate Change report
Renewable energy could be more beneficial to the UK than carbon capture and storage technology.
This is the view of a spokesman from the Green Party, who has called for more emphasis to be put on offshore wind, among other energy sectors.
The representative cited Denmark's success story with renewable energy: "If we generated the same proportion of our electricity from wind farms as Denmark does, and at the rate of growth Denmark has achieved, we'd create about 200,000 jobs by 2020."
His comments follow a report from the Committee on Climate Change (CCC), which advised the government to protect funding for low-carbon technologies.
According to the CCC, the UK should focus its funding and support on a range of low-carbon sectors, including both carbon capture and storage and renewable energy from offshore wind and marine sources.
The government has promised to deliver a Green Investment Bank in order to supply much of the funding required to support new sustainable technologies.
Posted by Mark Stephens
Sign up for regular email updates to help you save money and energy
For more information please see:
Committee on Climate Change report
Australia Launches Auto-Rebate Program
By JAMES GLYNN
SYDNEY -- Australia's ruling Labor Party on Saturday unveiled a cash-for-clunkers style scheme to woo the environmental vote ahead of the Aug. 21 federal election.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced the plan, which will see the government rebate 2,000 Australian dollars (about US$1,800) to anybody that trades in a car built before 1995 and buys a modern vehicle that meets current emission standards.
With the Green vote critical for both major parties ahead of the election, Ms. Gillard told reporters in Brisbane the rebate will be limited to 200,000 vehicles.
With an estimated two million cars on Australia's roads built before 1995, Ms. Gillard said this will provide "a bit of practical help" for vehicle owners wanting to upgrade.
Ms. Gillard also said that if re-elected, a Labor government would introduce new mandatory fuel efficiency standards for "the cars of the future."
"We will consult on these standards with the industry" and they will take effect in 2015, she said.
Write to James Glynn at james.glynn@dowjones.com
SYDNEY -- Australia's ruling Labor Party on Saturday unveiled a cash-for-clunkers style scheme to woo the environmental vote ahead of the Aug. 21 federal election.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard announced the plan, which will see the government rebate 2,000 Australian dollars (about US$1,800) to anybody that trades in a car built before 1995 and buys a modern vehicle that meets current emission standards.
With the Green vote critical for both major parties ahead of the election, Ms. Gillard told reporters in Brisbane the rebate will be limited to 200,000 vehicles.
With an estimated two million cars on Australia's roads built before 1995, Ms. Gillard said this will provide "a bit of practical help" for vehicle owners wanting to upgrade.
Ms. Gillard also said that if re-elected, a Labor government would introduce new mandatory fuel efficiency standards for "the cars of the future."
"We will consult on these standards with the industry" and they will take effect in 2015, she said.
Write to James Glynn at james.glynn@dowjones.com
Modern cargo ships slow to the speed of the sailing clippers
Container ships are taking longer to cross the oceans than the Cutty Sark did as owners adopt 'super-slow steaming' to cut back on fuel consumption
John Vidal The Observer, Sunday 25 July 2010
The world's largest cargo ships are travelling at lower speeds today than sailing clippers such as the Cutty Sark did more than 130 years ago.
A combination of the recession and growing awareness in the shipping industry about climate change emissions encouraged many ship owners to adopt "slow steaming" to save fuel two years ago. This lowered speeds from the standard 25 knots to 20 knots, but many major companies have now taken this a stage further by adopting "super-slow steaming" at speeds of 12 knots (about 14mph).
Travel times between the US and China, or between Australia and Europe, are now comparable to those of the great age of sail in the 19th century. American clippers reached 14 to 17 knots in the 1850s, with the fastest recording speeds of 22 knots or more.
Maersk, the world's largest shipping line, with more than 600 ships, has adapted its giant marine diesel engines to travel at super-slow speeds without suffering damage. This reduces fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by 30%. It is believed that the company has saved more than £65m on fuel since it began its go-slow.
Ship engines are traditionally profligate and polluting. Designed to run at high speeds, they burn the cheapest "bunker" oil and are not subject to the same air quality rules as cars. In the boom before 2007, the Emma Maersk, one of the world's largest container ships, would burn around 300 tonnes of fuel a day, emitting as much as 1,000 tonnes of CO2 a day – roughly as much as the 30 lowest emitting countries in the world.
Maersk spokesman Bo Cerup-Simonsen said: "The cost benefits are clear. When speed is reduced by 20%, fuel consumption is reduced by 40% per nautical mile. Slow steaming is here to stay. Its introduction has been the most important factor in reducing our CO2 emissions in recent years, and we have not yet realised the full potential. Our goal is to reducing CO2 emissions by 25%."
The Royal Navy and BP, meanwhile, are among those adopting different ways to reduce fuel use and cut carbon emissions. The Ark Royal light aircraft carrier, the new Queen Mary 2 cruise liner and 350 other large commercial ships have had their hulls coated with special anti-fouling paint. This has been shown to cut around 9% from CO2 emissions by keeping their bottoms free from barnacles and other sea life.
Some ships have been fitted with kite-like "skysails", or systems that force compressed air out of hulls to allow them to "ride" on a cushion of bubbles. These measures can cut fuel consumption by up to 20%.
Environmentalists say that a reduction in speeds makes sense but warn that there is no guarantee that ships would not revert back to full throttle once economic conditions improve.
WWF International's marine manager, Simon Walmsley, said: "It's a no-brainer. Slower speeds reduce pollution but what the industry needs to do is to address its whole supply chain."
John Sauven, head of Greenpeace, said: "The simplest thing you can do to reduce emissions is reduce speed, but this must now be backed by regulation to make this the norm."
John Vidal The Observer, Sunday 25 July 2010
The world's largest cargo ships are travelling at lower speeds today than sailing clippers such as the Cutty Sark did more than 130 years ago.
A combination of the recession and growing awareness in the shipping industry about climate change emissions encouraged many ship owners to adopt "slow steaming" to save fuel two years ago. This lowered speeds from the standard 25 knots to 20 knots, but many major companies have now taken this a stage further by adopting "super-slow steaming" at speeds of 12 knots (about 14mph).
Travel times between the US and China, or between Australia and Europe, are now comparable to those of the great age of sail in the 19th century. American clippers reached 14 to 17 knots in the 1850s, with the fastest recording speeds of 22 knots or more.
Maersk, the world's largest shipping line, with more than 600 ships, has adapted its giant marine diesel engines to travel at super-slow speeds without suffering damage. This reduces fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions by 30%. It is believed that the company has saved more than £65m on fuel since it began its go-slow.
Ship engines are traditionally profligate and polluting. Designed to run at high speeds, they burn the cheapest "bunker" oil and are not subject to the same air quality rules as cars. In the boom before 2007, the Emma Maersk, one of the world's largest container ships, would burn around 300 tonnes of fuel a day, emitting as much as 1,000 tonnes of CO2 a day – roughly as much as the 30 lowest emitting countries in the world.
Maersk spokesman Bo Cerup-Simonsen said: "The cost benefits are clear. When speed is reduced by 20%, fuel consumption is reduced by 40% per nautical mile. Slow steaming is here to stay. Its introduction has been the most important factor in reducing our CO2 emissions in recent years, and we have not yet realised the full potential. Our goal is to reducing CO2 emissions by 25%."
The Royal Navy and BP, meanwhile, are among those adopting different ways to reduce fuel use and cut carbon emissions. The Ark Royal light aircraft carrier, the new Queen Mary 2 cruise liner and 350 other large commercial ships have had their hulls coated with special anti-fouling paint. This has been shown to cut around 9% from CO2 emissions by keeping their bottoms free from barnacles and other sea life.
Some ships have been fitted with kite-like "skysails", or systems that force compressed air out of hulls to allow them to "ride" on a cushion of bubbles. These measures can cut fuel consumption by up to 20%.
Environmentalists say that a reduction in speeds makes sense but warn that there is no guarantee that ships would not revert back to full throttle once economic conditions improve.
WWF International's marine manager, Simon Walmsley, said: "It's a no-brainer. Slower speeds reduce pollution but what the industry needs to do is to address its whole supply chain."
John Sauven, head of Greenpeace, said: "The simplest thing you can do to reduce emissions is reduce speed, but this must now be backed by regulation to make this the norm."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
