POSTED BY: Bill Sweet / Mon, August 23, 2010
As reported by my fellow blogger David Levitan a couple of weeks ago, the U.S. Department of Energy has announced that its futuristic zero-carbon-generation project will be based on oxycombustion, not on integrated-gasification, combined-cycle technology, as had been expected for more than a decade. With some reason, Levitan suspects the whole project may have turned into an ongoing boondoggle; certainly, FutureGen has come to seem rather like nuclear fusion--the technology that's always just a decade or two away but, like a mirage, never actually gets any closer.
Nevertheless, I'd like to offer another perspective: Possibly DOE's decision is sound and will open the way, at last, for FutureGen to actually be built and then lead, as hoped, to commercial prospects for zero-carbon coal-fired generation.
Several years ago, IEEE Spectrum magazine designated as one of its January winners the oxycombustion plant that Vattenfall, Sweden's national energy company, was building at Schwarze Pumpe, a site in eastern Germany. At that time, as we explained, IGCC still was generally considered the front runner in so-called clean coal technology. Yet the Florida plant that had pioneered the technology in the United States did not make a particularly prepossessing impression and for years had been generating the country's most expensive electricity by far. And now, two companies with substantial reputations in the power business, Vattenfall and Alstom, were betting on a different horse, dubbed oxyfuel or oxyfiring or oxycombustion.
In oxycombustion, coal is burned in an almost pure oxygen atmosphere, so that emissions contain virtually no NOx, which makes it easier to separate and store the carbon initially contained in the coal. IGCC involves gasifying coal, filtering out the carbon, and finally burning hydrogen to generate power. A big barrier to commercialization of oxyfuel is the initial separation of oxygen from air, which is expensive. But the technology is conceptually much simpler and arguably more elegant than IGCC.
Last November, Vattenfall announced that it was recovering virtually 100 percent of the carbon from the fuel burned at its small Schwarze Pumpe demonstration plant. Spectrum's account of the plant is somewhat dated, as the facility is being continually redesigned and rebuilt as part of Vattenfall's ongoing experiment. A fairly recent, nicely illustrated update about the oxyfuel plant is available.
Thursday, 26 August 2010
Shell, Cosan to form Joint Venture for biofuels, power
New Statesman
Published 26 August 2010
Print versionEmail a friendListenRSSShell are making moves to commercialise biofuels as they look to expand their product range.
Royal Dutch Shell and Brazil-based Cosan have signed a joint venture agreement to produce and commercialise ethanol and power based on sugar cane in Brazil.
The project, estimated to entail an investment of $12bn, will have an annual capacity to produce two billion litres of biofuels.
Cosan will supply sugar cane bagasse from its sugar mills for power generation.
Shell intends to adopt next generation biofuel technologies from its joint venture companies, Iogen Energy and Codexis.
The scheme envisages a distribution and retail network for industrial and transportation fuels. Regulatory approvals are now awaited.
The Joint Venture intends to explore global business opportunities in production and sales of ethanol and sugar.
Published 26 August 2010
Print versionEmail a friendListenRSSShell are making moves to commercialise biofuels as they look to expand their product range.
Royal Dutch Shell and Brazil-based Cosan have signed a joint venture agreement to produce and commercialise ethanol and power based on sugar cane in Brazil.
The project, estimated to entail an investment of $12bn, will have an annual capacity to produce two billion litres of biofuels.
Cosan will supply sugar cane bagasse from its sugar mills for power generation.
Shell intends to adopt next generation biofuel technologies from its joint venture companies, Iogen Energy and Codexis.
The scheme envisages a distribution and retail network for industrial and transportation fuels. Regulatory approvals are now awaited.
The Joint Venture intends to explore global business opportunities in production and sales of ethanol and sugar.
Euro Multivision starts production of solar photovoltaic cell
Source: IRIS (24-AUG-10)
Euro Multivision has commenced the commercial production of solar photovoltaic cell project of 40MW capacity from today.
Euro Multivision is the second largest Indian company in the business of manufacturing CDs and DVDs.
The stock had outperformed the market over the past one month till Aug. 23, 2010, rising 6.92% compared with the Sensex`s 1.54% rise. It outperformed the market in past one quarter, gaining 47.83% as against 11.94% rise in the Sensex.
Shares of the company declined Rs 0.05, or 0.15%, to settle at Rs 33.95. The total volume of shares traded was 38,989 at the BSE (Tuesday).
Euro Multivision has commenced the commercial production of solar photovoltaic cell project of 40MW capacity from today.
Euro Multivision is the second largest Indian company in the business of manufacturing CDs and DVDs.
The stock had outperformed the market over the past one month till Aug. 23, 2010, rising 6.92% compared with the Sensex`s 1.54% rise. It outperformed the market in past one quarter, gaining 47.83% as against 11.94% rise in the Sensex.
Shares of the company declined Rs 0.05, or 0.15%, to settle at Rs 33.95. The total volume of shares traded was 38,989 at the BSE (Tuesday).
Australian Capital Territory to pass tough carbon cutting laws
ACT's climate change and greenhouse gas reduction bill aims to cut carbon emissions by 40% by 2020 from 1990 levels
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 26 August 2010 10.49 BST
The government of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) said today it will enact tough carbon cutting laws, a step that comes after a national election that punished the ruling Labor party over lack of action on climate change.
The ACT, which includes the capital Canberra also ruled by Labor, said its climate change and greenhouse gas reduction bill would set a target of cutting carbon emissions by 40% by 2020 from 1990 levels.
The cut would rise to 80% by 2050, with the aim of the territory of nearly 400,000 people becoming carbon neutral by 2060.
Last week's national election left neither Labor nor the rival Liberal/National coalition with the 76 seats in the 150-seat lower house of parliament needed to claim victory.
Both parties are wooing four independents and the Greens to try to form a minority government.
"Governments have a responsibility to act on this issue," said Simon Corbell, the ACT's minister for the environment climate change and water.
Corbell said the aim was to cut planet-warming carbon emissions by boosting renewable energy and increasing energy efficiency in homes and businesses.
The bill establishes an independent climate change council and encourages the private sector to undertake voluntary agreements with the government.
Australia's Green party saw its national vote double to 12% in last weekend's election, reflecting widespread anger over Labor's perceived failure to honour its 2007 election pledge to take tough action on climate change.
Labor and the Liberals both back a 5% cut in emissions by 2020 on 2000 levels and Labor aimed to achieve this largely through an emissions trading scheme, with a higher target if the world agrees to a tougher climate pact.
However, fierce opposition and two rejections of the laws by a hostile Senate led Labor to shelve the legislation in April, a step that angered many voters but bolstered the popularity of the Greens because of their stronger climate policies.
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 26 August 2010 10.49 BST
The government of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) said today it will enact tough carbon cutting laws, a step that comes after a national election that punished the ruling Labor party over lack of action on climate change.
The ACT, which includes the capital Canberra also ruled by Labor, said its climate change and greenhouse gas reduction bill would set a target of cutting carbon emissions by 40% by 2020 from 1990 levels.
The cut would rise to 80% by 2050, with the aim of the territory of nearly 400,000 people becoming carbon neutral by 2060.
Last week's national election left neither Labor nor the rival Liberal/National coalition with the 76 seats in the 150-seat lower house of parliament needed to claim victory.
Both parties are wooing four independents and the Greens to try to form a minority government.
"Governments have a responsibility to act on this issue," said Simon Corbell, the ACT's minister for the environment climate change and water.
Corbell said the aim was to cut planet-warming carbon emissions by boosting renewable energy and increasing energy efficiency in homes and businesses.
The bill establishes an independent climate change council and encourages the private sector to undertake voluntary agreements with the government.
Australia's Green party saw its national vote double to 12% in last weekend's election, reflecting widespread anger over Labor's perceived failure to honour its 2007 election pledge to take tough action on climate change.
Labor and the Liberals both back a 5% cut in emissions by 2020 on 2000 levels and Labor aimed to achieve this largely through an emissions trading scheme, with a higher target if the world agrees to a tougher climate pact.
However, fierce opposition and two rejections of the laws by a hostile Senate led Labor to shelve the legislation in April, a step that angered many voters but bolstered the popularity of the Greens because of their stronger climate policies.
UK's nuclear reactor programme falls behind schedule
Regulator and builders blame each other for construction hold-up as designs await approval
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 25 August 2010 20.25 BST
The schedule for the UK's nuclear reactor building programme has slipped behind already, the safety regulator has admitted, reinforcing concerns that the first reactor will not be built on time.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said it would probably have to issue an "interim" decision on the safety of the two new proposed reactor designs next June, the deadline for its assessment programme. The regulator expects significant chunks of extra work will remain before it can finally approve or reject the designs, but did not say how long this would take.
Kevin Allars, director of the assessment programme at the HSE, said that companies could continue planning and carry out preparatory construction on proposed nuclear sites while they waited for a final decision. But he insisted that construction of a reactor could not start without its consent.
Allars promised there would be no repeat of the chaotic construction in Finland of what was supposed to be Europe's first new reactor in decades. The Areva plant is more than three years behind schedule and more than €2bn (£1.6bn) over budget, with the Finnish regulator trying to approve each component of the design while it is being built. EDF has promised that the UK's first reactor will be operational in 2018, although it had originally said it would be running by the end of 2017.
The HSE said the companies behind the designs – French consortium Areva, EDF and US firm Westinghouse – had been repeatedly submitting information which was incomplete and late.
In turn, the companies are blaming the regulator for not having sufficient resources to carry out the work. The Guardian revealed last year that the arm of the HSE which was carrying out the work – the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) – had been forced to hire more than a dozen project managers, even though they work for the companies hoping to build the designs under review.
In its quarterly update on the assessment programme, the HSE admitted that this risk of a conflict of interest was a "factor of increasing significance" which it said it would "continue to monitor closely".
Westinghouse, which has put forward its AP1000 reactor design, comes in for particularly harsh criticism. Allars said of the company: "It's very frustrating. We get a load [of work] in late and then we do not get what we were promised or of the quality we were promised. If this carries on they won't get a design acceptance."
The HSE has already raised a red flag over Westinghouse's civil engineering plans for key structures making up the reactor core, which the regulator says are not sufficiently robust. The company was supposed to carry out further analysis by the end of June, but most of this has been delayed, while what had been done "fell significantly short of what we expected".
"Significant issues" are also flagged for Westinghouse's planned control and instrumentation systems to operate the reactor. The company missed a June deadline to provide information on reactor chemistry, "which does not help our confidence that Westinghouse will meet future delivery dates", said the HSE.
A Westinghouse spokesman said: "We accept that some of our input in one or two areas has not met the regulator's expectations."
A Greenpeace spokesman said: "The generic design assessment [GDA] process has already unearthed a string of nasty surprises within the new nuclear reactors' designs. But now we find out GDA won't even be able to give a final green light to the reactor designs. This means we could be faced with the farcical situation where the government is letting utilities press ahead with building work for reactors that haven't been given safety approval."
Tim Webb guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 25 August 2010 20.25 BST
The schedule for the UK's nuclear reactor building programme has slipped behind already, the safety regulator has admitted, reinforcing concerns that the first reactor will not be built on time.
The Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said it would probably have to issue an "interim" decision on the safety of the two new proposed reactor designs next June, the deadline for its assessment programme. The regulator expects significant chunks of extra work will remain before it can finally approve or reject the designs, but did not say how long this would take.
Kevin Allars, director of the assessment programme at the HSE, said that companies could continue planning and carry out preparatory construction on proposed nuclear sites while they waited for a final decision. But he insisted that construction of a reactor could not start without its consent.
Allars promised there would be no repeat of the chaotic construction in Finland of what was supposed to be Europe's first new reactor in decades. The Areva plant is more than three years behind schedule and more than €2bn (£1.6bn) over budget, with the Finnish regulator trying to approve each component of the design while it is being built. EDF has promised that the UK's first reactor will be operational in 2018, although it had originally said it would be running by the end of 2017.
The HSE said the companies behind the designs – French consortium Areva, EDF and US firm Westinghouse – had been repeatedly submitting information which was incomplete and late.
In turn, the companies are blaming the regulator for not having sufficient resources to carry out the work. The Guardian revealed last year that the arm of the HSE which was carrying out the work – the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate (NII) – had been forced to hire more than a dozen project managers, even though they work for the companies hoping to build the designs under review.
In its quarterly update on the assessment programme, the HSE admitted that this risk of a conflict of interest was a "factor of increasing significance" which it said it would "continue to monitor closely".
Westinghouse, which has put forward its AP1000 reactor design, comes in for particularly harsh criticism. Allars said of the company: "It's very frustrating. We get a load [of work] in late and then we do not get what we were promised or of the quality we were promised. If this carries on they won't get a design acceptance."
The HSE has already raised a red flag over Westinghouse's civil engineering plans for key structures making up the reactor core, which the regulator says are not sufficiently robust. The company was supposed to carry out further analysis by the end of June, but most of this has been delayed, while what had been done "fell significantly short of what we expected".
"Significant issues" are also flagged for Westinghouse's planned control and instrumentation systems to operate the reactor. The company missed a June deadline to provide information on reactor chemistry, "which does not help our confidence that Westinghouse will meet future delivery dates", said the HSE.
A Westinghouse spokesman said: "We accept that some of our input in one or two areas has not met the regulator's expectations."
A Greenpeace spokesman said: "The generic design assessment [GDA] process has already unearthed a string of nasty surprises within the new nuclear reactors' designs. But now we find out GDA won't even be able to give a final green light to the reactor designs. This means we could be faced with the farcical situation where the government is letting utilities press ahead with building work for reactors that haven't been given safety approval."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
