Posted on: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:45:32 EDT
BEIJING, Sep 16, 2010 (AsiaPulse via COMTEX) --
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI, TSE:7011) announced on Wednesday that it has agreed to transfer its 2.5-MW wind turbine generator system (WTGS) technology to China-based Ningxia Yinxing Energy (SSE:000862).
The transaction is an extension of a technology transfer agreement between the two companies in 2007, when MHI transferred 1.0MW WTGS technology to the Chinese power generator. Ningxia Yinxiang Energy was then called Wuzhong Instrument in 2007.
A spokesman for MHI said the wind power generation market has showed robust growth, and MHI believes that it will make profit faster through technical cooperation than by setting up manufacturing plants in China or exporting generator sets to the country.
To meet strong local demand for electricity and ensure environmental sustainability, China has accelerated the pace of increasing the coverage of wind power stations. China newly installed over 14 million kW of wind power capacity in 2009.
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Successful integration of biofuels and combustion engines vital for biofuel success, says report
September 15, 2010
Transportation experts are proposing that the research and development of next-generation biofuels must be done in conjunction with the development of advanced combustion engines if those biofuels are to become a reality and long-term success in the U.S. transportation sector, according to a new report issued by Sandia National Laboratories.
The recommendations were made following a Sandia-hosted workshop held in November, Next Generation Biofuels and Advanced Engines for Tomorrow’s Transportation Needs. Participants included researchers at the Department of Energy’s Combustion Research Facility (CRF) and Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), as well as representatives from oil companies, biofuel developers, engine manufacturers, suppliers and experts from the university, regulatory, finance and national laboratory communities.
The workshop, said Ron Stoltz, manager of Sandia’s Advanced Energy Initiatives, was designed to identify opportunities for co-development of biofuels and engines, an often-overlooked issue.
“The oil companies and the automobile and truck engine companies have engaged in a dialogue and collaboration on fuel and engine issues for almost 100 years,” Stoltz said. “But the same cannot be said for the majority of biofuel start-up companies, especially those that are thinking ‘beyond ethanol’. The report highlights how fragmented the biofuels industry is today and how, by putting serious thought behind some key issues like fuel chemistry linked to engine performance, great strides can be made.”
The primary goal of the workshop, Stoltz said, was to foster dialog among researchers and experts from industry, academia and government, with the ultimate hope of finding ways to accelerate the transition to biofuels.
Workshop participants agreed that a series of key attributes are necessary to make the introduction of next-generation biofuels a reality in the transportation sector. Biofuels, they concluded, must be:
• Clean (at or below EPA-designated pollutants criteria);
• Sustainable (a CO2 footprint below that of the petroleum-based fuels being displaced); and
• Compatible (with current and future engine designs, and with current and future distribution infrastructure).
Among other observations, participants also concluded that a consolidated, federally-funded research program on biofuels and advanced engine concepts is necessary to accelerate the transition to biofuels.
Four key recommended actions emerged from the workshop:
• Modernize the testing, specification, and certification of all fuels;
• Plan and integrate the research and development of next-generation biofuels in conjunction with the development of advanced engines;
• Develop specific guidelines, roadmaps, and objectives for co-development of next-generation biofuels and advanced engines; and
• Convene an International Fuels and Engines Summit, sponsored by industry with government and university participation, to ratify a fuels/engine strategy and implementation framework.
Bob Carling, director of Sandia’s Transportation Energy Center, said Sandia’s role as a national laboratory is to look to the future and inform policy makers and others as to the potential of advanced technologies and those technical challenges that stand in the way of commercialization.
“In the biofuel arena, or more generally advanced liquid fuels, the need is to understand how chemistry impacts the performance of any advanced fuel either through efficiency gains or losses while meeting current emission regulations,” Carling said. “Sandia will continue to work with the scientific and engineering community as new, advanced liquid fuels are being developed to integrate its research into our work in the development of knowledge and understanding of chemistry and its role in new internal combustion engine architectures.”
More information: The full report is now available online at http://www.sandia. … /index.html.
Provided by Sandia National Laboratories
Transportation experts are proposing that the research and development of next-generation biofuels must be done in conjunction with the development of advanced combustion engines if those biofuels are to become a reality and long-term success in the U.S. transportation sector, according to a new report issued by Sandia National Laboratories.
The recommendations were made following a Sandia-hosted workshop held in November, Next Generation Biofuels and Advanced Engines for Tomorrow’s Transportation Needs. Participants included researchers at the Department of Energy’s Combustion Research Facility (CRF) and Joint BioEnergy Institute (JBEI), as well as representatives from oil companies, biofuel developers, engine manufacturers, suppliers and experts from the university, regulatory, finance and national laboratory communities.
The workshop, said Ron Stoltz, manager of Sandia’s Advanced Energy Initiatives, was designed to identify opportunities for co-development of biofuels and engines, an often-overlooked issue.
“The oil companies and the automobile and truck engine companies have engaged in a dialogue and collaboration on fuel and engine issues for almost 100 years,” Stoltz said. “But the same cannot be said for the majority of biofuel start-up companies, especially those that are thinking ‘beyond ethanol’. The report highlights how fragmented the biofuels industry is today and how, by putting serious thought behind some key issues like fuel chemistry linked to engine performance, great strides can be made.”
The primary goal of the workshop, Stoltz said, was to foster dialog among researchers and experts from industry, academia and government, with the ultimate hope of finding ways to accelerate the transition to biofuels.
Workshop participants agreed that a series of key attributes are necessary to make the introduction of next-generation biofuels a reality in the transportation sector. Biofuels, they concluded, must be:
• Clean (at or below EPA-designated pollutants criteria);
• Sustainable (a CO2 footprint below that of the petroleum-based fuels being displaced); and
• Compatible (with current and future engine designs, and with current and future distribution infrastructure).
Among other observations, participants also concluded that a consolidated, federally-funded research program on biofuels and advanced engine concepts is necessary to accelerate the transition to biofuels.
Four key recommended actions emerged from the workshop:
• Modernize the testing, specification, and certification of all fuels;
• Plan and integrate the research and development of next-generation biofuels in conjunction with the development of advanced engines;
• Develop specific guidelines, roadmaps, and objectives for co-development of next-generation biofuels and advanced engines; and
• Convene an International Fuels and Engines Summit, sponsored by industry with government and university participation, to ratify a fuels/engine strategy and implementation framework.
Bob Carling, director of Sandia’s Transportation Energy Center, said Sandia’s role as a national laboratory is to look to the future and inform policy makers and others as to the potential of advanced technologies and those technical challenges that stand in the way of commercialization.
“In the biofuel arena, or more generally advanced liquid fuels, the need is to understand how chemistry impacts the performance of any advanced fuel either through efficiency gains or losses while meeting current emission regulations,” Carling said. “Sandia will continue to work with the scientific and engineering community as new, advanced liquid fuels are being developed to integrate its research into our work in the development of knowledge and understanding of chemistry and its role in new internal combustion engine architectures.”
More information: The full report is now available online at http://www.sandia. … /index.html.
Provided by Sandia National Laboratories
Shell looks to carbon-capture in Canada
Published: Sept. 15, 2010 at 9:11 AM
ArticleListenComments. Share
CALGARY, Alberta, Sept. 15 (UPI) -- Carbon dioxide captured from the production of oil sands in Canada will allay environmental concerns associated with development, Shell said.
Shell announced Wednesday that it started an expansion project tied to its operations at the Athabasca oil sands project. Production at the site, the Jackpine mine, adds another 100,000 barrels of oil equivalent to the existing capacity of 155,000 boe per day produced at the facility.
Marvin Odum, the director of upstream activity for Shell, said in a statement that the Jackpine mine was a "tremendous addition" to his company's oil sands portfolio.
"Canada's oil sands are an important source of energy in a world with increasing energy needs," he said. "Shell is committed to developing this resource responsibly and to pursuing opportunities to reduce the impacts of our oil sands operations."
Environmental groups complain that oil sands development would cause irreparable harm to the environment and release substantial amounts of harmful carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.
Odum said that to reduce the carbon footprint associated with oil sands development, his company has proposed an advanced carbon capture and storage project that would store more than 1 million tons of CO2 underground.
ArticleListenComments. Share
CALGARY, Alberta, Sept. 15 (UPI) -- Carbon dioxide captured from the production of oil sands in Canada will allay environmental concerns associated with development, Shell said.
Shell announced Wednesday that it started an expansion project tied to its operations at the Athabasca oil sands project. Production at the site, the Jackpine mine, adds another 100,000 barrels of oil equivalent to the existing capacity of 155,000 boe per day produced at the facility.
Marvin Odum, the director of upstream activity for Shell, said in a statement that the Jackpine mine was a "tremendous addition" to his company's oil sands portfolio.
"Canada's oil sands are an important source of energy in a world with increasing energy needs," he said. "Shell is committed to developing this resource responsibly and to pursuing opportunities to reduce the impacts of our oil sands operations."
Environmental groups complain that oil sands development would cause irreparable harm to the environment and release substantial amounts of harmful carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere.
Odum said that to reduce the carbon footprint associated with oil sands development, his company has proposed an advanced carbon capture and storage project that would store more than 1 million tons of CO2 underground.
How science will shape climate adaptation plans
Scientists must press on in developing the emerging tools that will help governments make decisions on adapting to climate change
• UK 'poorly prepared for impact of global warming'
Vicky Pope
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 16 September 2010 06.59 BST
Some would argue that the demand for information on how climate change will affect our future outstrips the current capability of the science and climate models. My view is that as scientists, we can provide useful information, but we need to be clear about its limitations and strive to improve information for the future. We need to be clear about the uncertainties in our projections while still extracting useful information for practical decision-making.
I have been involved in developing climate models for the last 15 years and despite their limitations we are now able to assess the probability of different outcomes for the first time. That means we can quantify the risk of these outcomes happening. These projections – the UK climate projections published in 2009 - are already forming the backbone of adaptation decisions being made in the UK for 50 to 100 years ahead.
A project commissioned by the Environment Agency to investigate the impact of climate change on the Thames estuary over the next 100 years concluded that current government predictions for sea level rise are realistic. A major outcome from the scientific analysis was that the worst-case scenarios for high water levels can be significantly reduced - from 4.2m to 2.7m – because we are able to rule out the more extreme sea level rise. As a result, massive investment in a tide-excluding estuary barrage is unlikely to be needed this century. This will be reviewed as more information becomes available, taking a flexible approach to adaptation.
The energy industry, working with the Met Office, looked at the likely impact of climate change on its infrastructure. The project found that very few changes in design standards are required, although it did highlight a number of issues. For instance, transformers could suffer higher failure rates and efficiency of some types of thermal power station could be markedly reduced because of increasing temperatures. A particular concern highlighted by this report and reiterated in today's report from the Climate Change Committee - the independent body that advises government on its climate targets - is that little is known about how winds will change in the future - important because of the increasing role of wind power in the UK energy mix.
Fortunately many people, from private industry to government, recognise the value of even incomplete information to help make decisions about the future. Demand for climate information is increasing, particularly relating to changes in the short to medium term. More still needs to be done to refine the climate projections and make them more usable and accessible. This is especially true if we are to provide reliable projections for the next 10 to 30 years. The necessary science and modelling tools are being developed, and the first tentative results are being produced.
We need particularly to look at how we communicate complex and often conflicting results. In order to explain complex science to a lay audience, scientists and journalists are prone to progressively downplay the complexity. Conversely, in striving to adopt a more scientific approach and include the full range of uncertainty, we often give sceptics an easy route to undermine the science.
All too often uncertainty in science offers a convenient excuse for delaying important decisions. However, in the case of climate change there is overwhelming evidence that the climate is changing — in part due to human activities — and that changes will accelerate if emissions continue unabated.
In examining the uncertainty in the science we must take care to not throw away what we do know. Science has established that climate is changing. Scientists now need to press on in developing the emerging tools that will be used to underpin sensible adaptation decisions which will determine our future.
• Vicky Pope is the head of climate science advice at the Met Office Hadley Centre
• UK 'poorly prepared for impact of global warming'
Vicky Pope
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 16 September 2010 06.59 BST
Some would argue that the demand for information on how climate change will affect our future outstrips the current capability of the science and climate models. My view is that as scientists, we can provide useful information, but we need to be clear about its limitations and strive to improve information for the future. We need to be clear about the uncertainties in our projections while still extracting useful information for practical decision-making.
I have been involved in developing climate models for the last 15 years and despite their limitations we are now able to assess the probability of different outcomes for the first time. That means we can quantify the risk of these outcomes happening. These projections – the UK climate projections published in 2009 - are already forming the backbone of adaptation decisions being made in the UK for 50 to 100 years ahead.
A project commissioned by the Environment Agency to investigate the impact of climate change on the Thames estuary over the next 100 years concluded that current government predictions for sea level rise are realistic. A major outcome from the scientific analysis was that the worst-case scenarios for high water levels can be significantly reduced - from 4.2m to 2.7m – because we are able to rule out the more extreme sea level rise. As a result, massive investment in a tide-excluding estuary barrage is unlikely to be needed this century. This will be reviewed as more information becomes available, taking a flexible approach to adaptation.
The energy industry, working with the Met Office, looked at the likely impact of climate change on its infrastructure. The project found that very few changes in design standards are required, although it did highlight a number of issues. For instance, transformers could suffer higher failure rates and efficiency of some types of thermal power station could be markedly reduced because of increasing temperatures. A particular concern highlighted by this report and reiterated in today's report from the Climate Change Committee - the independent body that advises government on its climate targets - is that little is known about how winds will change in the future - important because of the increasing role of wind power in the UK energy mix.
Fortunately many people, from private industry to government, recognise the value of even incomplete information to help make decisions about the future. Demand for climate information is increasing, particularly relating to changes in the short to medium term. More still needs to be done to refine the climate projections and make them more usable and accessible. This is especially true if we are to provide reliable projections for the next 10 to 30 years. The necessary science and modelling tools are being developed, and the first tentative results are being produced.
We need particularly to look at how we communicate complex and often conflicting results. In order to explain complex science to a lay audience, scientists and journalists are prone to progressively downplay the complexity. Conversely, in striving to adopt a more scientific approach and include the full range of uncertainty, we often give sceptics an easy route to undermine the science.
All too often uncertainty in science offers a convenient excuse for delaying important decisions. However, in the case of climate change there is overwhelming evidence that the climate is changing — in part due to human activities — and that changes will accelerate if emissions continue unabated.
In examining the uncertainty in the science we must take care to not throw away what we do know. Science has established that climate is changing. Scientists now need to press on in developing the emerging tools that will be used to underpin sensible adaptation decisions which will determine our future.
• Vicky Pope is the head of climate science advice at the Met Office Hadley Centre
World Bank invests record sums in coal
Last year, $3.4bn was invested in the dirtiest fossil fuel despite international commitments to cut emissions
Juliette Jowit guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 September 2010 17.18 BST
Record sums were invested last year in coal power - the most carbon intensive form of energy on the planet - by the World Bank, despite international commitments to slash the carbon emissions blamed for climate change.
The World Bank said this week that a total of US$3.4bn (£2.2bn) - or a quarter of all funding for energy projects - was spent in the year to June 2010 helping to build new coal-fired power stations, including the controversial Medupi plant in South Africa. Over the same period the bank also spent $1bn (£640m) on looking and drilling for oil and gas.
However, the Bank Information Centre, which examined the spending, disagreed and said the figure invested in coal was $4.4bn in the fiscal year 2009-10.
The discrepancy is due to the World Bank not including in its figure a $1bn project in India which is funding power transmission networks for coal-fired power stations rather than the stations themselves.
Environmental campaign groups said spending on coal in that period was 40 times more than five years ago, and claimed there was an "incoherence at the heart of the World Bank's thinking about energy" that would damage long term attempts to cut emissions of carbon and other greenhouse gases from such plants.
"At the same time as the bank is seeking to gain control of the billions which will be channelled to developing countries to help them cope with global warming, the bank is still lending staggeringly large and growing sums to finance coal-fired power," said Alison Doig, senior advisor on climate change for the charity Christian Aid.
"We know that coal is the dirtiest of all the fossil fuels - the one which most exacerbates the climate crisis which is having devastating effects on the lives of people living in poverty. We also know that by financing the building of coal power stations the bank is locking countries into coal use for the next 40 to 50 years [the life expectancy of the plants]."
The World Bank defended its payments saying that the figures for 2010 were distorted by two major coal projects in Botswana and South Africa, while over the five year period from 2005 the bank had spent US$4.5bn on coal power, and $12.5bn on renewable energy and energy efficiency - including a record year for these sectors also last year.
Coal plants were only subsidised when there were "exceptional circumstances where countries have few or no prospects for other energy sources," said Roger Morier, a World Bank spokesman.
"Our energy portfolio is increasingly oriented to renewable energy and energy efficiency," added Morier. "We are fulfilling our mandate of responding to the urgent needs of our client countries for access to efficient, reliable, affordable electricity, while also helping those countries to get on a low-carbon development path as soon as possible."
Juliette Jowit guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 15 September 2010 17.18 BST
Record sums were invested last year in coal power - the most carbon intensive form of energy on the planet - by the World Bank, despite international commitments to slash the carbon emissions blamed for climate change.
The World Bank said this week that a total of US$3.4bn (£2.2bn) - or a quarter of all funding for energy projects - was spent in the year to June 2010 helping to build new coal-fired power stations, including the controversial Medupi plant in South Africa. Over the same period the bank also spent $1bn (£640m) on looking and drilling for oil and gas.
However, the Bank Information Centre, which examined the spending, disagreed and said the figure invested in coal was $4.4bn in the fiscal year 2009-10.
The discrepancy is due to the World Bank not including in its figure a $1bn project in India which is funding power transmission networks for coal-fired power stations rather than the stations themselves.
Environmental campaign groups said spending on coal in that period was 40 times more than five years ago, and claimed there was an "incoherence at the heart of the World Bank's thinking about energy" that would damage long term attempts to cut emissions of carbon and other greenhouse gases from such plants.
"At the same time as the bank is seeking to gain control of the billions which will be channelled to developing countries to help them cope with global warming, the bank is still lending staggeringly large and growing sums to finance coal-fired power," said Alison Doig, senior advisor on climate change for the charity Christian Aid.
"We know that coal is the dirtiest of all the fossil fuels - the one which most exacerbates the climate crisis which is having devastating effects on the lives of people living in poverty. We also know that by financing the building of coal power stations the bank is locking countries into coal use for the next 40 to 50 years [the life expectancy of the plants]."
The World Bank defended its payments saying that the figures for 2010 were distorted by two major coal projects in Botswana and South Africa, while over the five year period from 2005 the bank had spent US$4.5bn on coal power, and $12.5bn on renewable energy and energy efficiency - including a record year for these sectors also last year.
Coal plants were only subsidised when there were "exceptional circumstances where countries have few or no prospects for other energy sources," said Roger Morier, a World Bank spokesman.
"Our energy portfolio is increasingly oriented to renewable energy and energy efficiency," added Morier. "We are fulfilling our mandate of responding to the urgent needs of our client countries for access to efficient, reliable, affordable electricity, while also helping those countries to get on a low-carbon development path as soon as possible."