UK goes full speed ahead on shale gas fracking.
- Thread starter TomUS
- Start date
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
Are you talking about that silly trade in carbon-bucks under the last lot?
By the way what sort of scale of investment do you think would be needed (wind, solar, geothermal, tidal) to even begin to catch up with requirements?
free spirit
more tea vicar?
wind and solar combined generated around 1/3 of nuclear in 2011, and would probably be up to 1/2 by now, so not really complete tiddlers any more, and will have significantly over taken nuclear long before any new nuclear generation comes on stream. There's the equivalent of a new nuclear power station coming on stream around every 1-2 years at the moment between wind and solar PV.
Thing is though, that we're actually not undercapacity at all, what OFgem and the papers miss is that we've been ramping up our gas generation capacity significantly over the last few years in anticipation of the shut down in coal generation, problem being that gas is so expensive and coal so cheap that companies have ended up mothballing those gas plants until they're needed. Question really is whether they'll bring them back online in time for this winter, I suspect they're going to seek to force the price up first as they need to make it economic, and generation from gas is completely uneconomic most of the time at the moment.
Then the issue is whether we have sufficient gas storage and supplies to cope with a harsh winter in terms of both heating and generation capacity - no chance we'd have made it through last winter without running out of gas if we'd had gas plants running instead of the coal plants (around a 20% swing from gas to coal last winter vs winter before).
This last point is where solar and wind really fit into the actual security of supply picture, as they reduce the total volumes of gas required through the winter, allowing gas reserves time to recover between cold spells, and reducing the gas required for electricity generation in those coal spells. Without them we'd be far more likely to run short of gas.
can't really argue with that assessment.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
cleaner than what?
It's far dirtier than north sea gas, maybe it's cleaner than mountain toping open cast coal mining or something, but there are vast quantities of chemical laced water required to actually do the fracturing process underground, all of which needs sourcing from somewhere, and dumping somewhere after hopefully being cleaned up, then there's the virtual certainty that with the number of wells you need, ground water / underground water reserves will end up getting polluted by both the fracking fluid and the gas itself.
Don't believe the hype:
The shale gas revolution: is it already over?
Shale Truth Interview with Arthur Berman
The shale gas revolution: is it already over?
Shale Truth Interview with Arthur Berman
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
Natural gas is not a clean burning fuel. You still get CO2 from it and you still need gas flue clean up technologies.
According to this article from the US EPA nat gas produces half as much CO2 as coal at a power plant. That's still not "clean" but cleaner. But then there's the problems of producing it.
http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/natural-gas.html
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
There's no emissions limits legislation anywhere in the world I am aware of that puts limits on CO2 produced by gas power plants, there's plenty for coal fired power plant emissions. Gas power is not clean in the same sense as coal because it still produces CO2 yet without controls. It's viewed as clean energy by politicians and the like but it given the world's propensity for gas power plants at the moment switching to gas as a replacement for coal and oil won't change much.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
given fossil fuels are all based on carbon and dead plants / animals it is unlikely that there will a) be a new source of them or b) that it will be a source of cleaner fuels.
There are new sources being discovered all the time. New deposits are being discovered in the US and more is being squeezed out of existing deposits. And of course the UK is planning a huge production of gas.
As far as the UK push for shale gas fracking, I think this may have something to do with it. Keep importing or produce domestically. All this new abundant & cheap gas & oil is going to make it extremely difficult for the green energy forces. I don't like it but I think they're pretty much toast.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23317370
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
There are no new sources of fossil fuels as there are no new fossil fuels: there is a finite quantity.
capitalism finally seems to be eating itself, or at least the land...
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Lynton Crosby again.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/19/david-cameron-fracking-lynton-crosby
Dirty frackin' cunt.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/jul/19/david-cameron-fracking-lynton-crosby
Dirty frackin' cunt.
I've had the impression that British politics wasn't nearly as corrupt as American. Guess I was wrong.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Why? Because people speak in cut glass accents here? You shouldn't be taken in by such things. The British are most adept at skulduggery. We have one political party that thinks it's fine to tamper with the internal mechanisms of their opposite number and while Watergate exposed Republican dirty tricks and people went to prison, no one goes to prison here. If the law actually worked in this country, Julian Lewis would have been doing time.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
Britain is an advanced plutocracy, has been for a very long time.
I also like pimpocracy as mentioned earlier
Implies that the plutocrats are running out of cash thus having to pimp out their resources for more cash.
camouflage
gaslit at scale.
I also like pimpocracy as mentioned earlier
Implies that the plutocrats are running out of cash thus having to pimp out their resources for more cash.
Education, healthcare, transport, pensions, social services, corporation tax, the environment, energy sustainability as an objective...
Stack em high sell em low, everything must go!
ddraig
kicking against the pricks...
spacemonkey
I Love Noodles
I’ve tried to summarise 15 pages of scenarios from a document I read recently about energy scenarios for Wales. I’m assuming this can be translated similarly to England. Hope it makes sense and shows some of the challenges we face.
Current model for Wales (per year)
Coal – 36TWh
Gas – 16.5TWh
Nuclear – 12TWh
Wind+Solar – 6TWh (Wind 5.58TWh, 0.42TWh Solar)
Hydro – 1.5TWh
Other – 0.15TWh
Annual total output for Wales – 72.53TWh.
If the two new nuclear powerstations go ahead (in North Wales and Gloucester) minimum production in the region will be 22.77TWh. So obviously fossil fuel will dominate for the next decade.
If we manage a 3% year on year demand reduction to 2023, we could get demand down to 53.47TWh. Alternatively in a high growth scenario (5% rise year on year) we’ll need 112TWh. The truth will probably lie somewhere in between. With the Government predicting the share of coal set to decline by 30% by 2015, only year on year reductions will prevent a serious undersupply.
So the government see fracking as a way of addressing this undersupply issue. Putting the environment aside, IF fracking could produce a 30-50% increase in domestic gas production by 2023 we could get an additional 10TWh. So the energy mix in Wales would then look like this -
Coal – 14TWh
Gas – 36TWh
Nuclear – 22TWh
Wind+Solar – 6TWh (Wind 5.58TWh, 0.42TWh Solar)
Hydro – 1.5TWh
Other – 0.15TWh
Even allowing for a 56% reduction in coal, it is still the second highest contributor, and all imported. Plus two new nukes. With the 3% reduction scenario we have a surplus of 23TWh. Under the 5% growth we have a massive 31TWh undersupply. Oops. Even though this is theoretical you can see why they’re so keen on it, and why demand is going to play a huge part.
Finally renewables, if all the renewables currently in construction and planning come on stream by 2023 (including the Atlantic Array and the Rhiannon Wind Farm) and run for 16 hours a day, 365 days a year it could theoretically generate 41TWh/yr. But some of the has to be split with Ireland. The Barrage could supply a further 15TWh but wouldn’t come online until the late 2020’s at the earliest. I don’t think building 800 hundred off-shore turbines is out of the question by 2023 and dispels the myth that renewables aren’t able to supply a high % of our mix. With the 3% reduction we could potentially power the country with 2 nukes plus renewables (plus some clever grid management).
This is just guesswork and there some big unknowns how it will all play out. Will nuclear rise to the challenge and come on-stream? How will our demand change? Will fracking deliver anywhere near its promise? Are we happy to see coal continue to play a big part in the mix, or fracking the lesser of two evils? Will the large off-shore windfarms get built and reliably supply power? This is only electricity, where do we get the gas to heat our buildings or do we switch to electric (massively increasing electricity demand)?
Answers on a postcard (and corrections to the figures welcome!)
Current model for Wales (per year)
Coal – 36TWh
Gas – 16.5TWh
Nuclear – 12TWh
Wind+Solar – 6TWh (Wind 5.58TWh, 0.42TWh Solar)
Hydro – 1.5TWh
Other – 0.15TWh
Annual total output for Wales – 72.53TWh.
If the two new nuclear powerstations go ahead (in North Wales and Gloucester) minimum production in the region will be 22.77TWh. So obviously fossil fuel will dominate for the next decade.
If we manage a 3% year on year demand reduction to 2023, we could get demand down to 53.47TWh. Alternatively in a high growth scenario (5% rise year on year) we’ll need 112TWh. The truth will probably lie somewhere in between. With the Government predicting the share of coal set to decline by 30% by 2015, only year on year reductions will prevent a serious undersupply.
So the government see fracking as a way of addressing this undersupply issue. Putting the environment aside, IF fracking could produce a 30-50% increase in domestic gas production by 2023 we could get an additional 10TWh. So the energy mix in Wales would then look like this -
Coal – 14TWh
Gas – 36TWh
Nuclear – 22TWh
Wind+Solar – 6TWh (Wind 5.58TWh, 0.42TWh Solar)
Hydro – 1.5TWh
Other – 0.15TWh
Even allowing for a 56% reduction in coal, it is still the second highest contributor, and all imported. Plus two new nukes. With the 3% reduction scenario we have a surplus of 23TWh. Under the 5% growth we have a massive 31TWh undersupply. Oops. Even though this is theoretical you can see why they’re so keen on it, and why demand is going to play a huge part.
Finally renewables, if all the renewables currently in construction and planning come on stream by 2023 (including the Atlantic Array and the Rhiannon Wind Farm) and run for 16 hours a day, 365 days a year it could theoretically generate 41TWh/yr. But some of the has to be split with Ireland. The Barrage could supply a further 15TWh but wouldn’t come online until the late 2020’s at the earliest. I don’t think building 800 hundred off-shore turbines is out of the question by 2023 and dispels the myth that renewables aren’t able to supply a high % of our mix. With the 3% reduction we could potentially power the country with 2 nukes plus renewables (plus some clever grid management).
This is just guesswork and there some big unknowns how it will all play out. Will nuclear rise to the challenge and come on-stream? How will our demand change? Will fracking deliver anywhere near its promise? Are we happy to see coal continue to play a big part in the mix, or fracking the lesser of two evils? Will the large off-shore windfarms get built and reliably supply power? This is only electricity, where do we get the gas to heat our buildings or do we switch to electric (massively increasing electricity demand)?
Answers on a postcard (and corrections to the figures welcome!)
sunny jim
A pikey fluffy type
The Balcombe gas fracking site near Brighton was blokaded and closed down today by over 50 activists! 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/25/anti-fracking-protesters-sussex-shale
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/jul/25/anti-fracking-protesters-sussex-shale
spacemonkey
I Love Noodles
snadge
metal alchemist
Most of the coal fired stations have at most 2-3 years before the fines for breaking emission levels become to much to bear, ATM there are plans to build quite few small biomass stations (37-45 Mw) running on straw etc and with bag filter emission control instead of the usual electrostatic precipitator method, saying that I feel that this is bad practice as most of the farmers have given over most of their crop fields to grow straw as their main product (lol).
Fracking is being pursued because it is a trick with smoke and mirrors to convince us that we will not see mass deaths due to fuel shortages in the near future.
Wait until Soylent Green hits the shelves before we start panicking.
Destroy the earth's surface and poison all our soil and water to prop up a defunct and dying economic system.
Wait until Soylent Green hits the shelves before we start panicking.
Destroy the earth's surface and poison all our soil and water to prop up a defunct and dying economic system.
ferrelhadley
There is no love between us anymore.
The current plan for Balcombe is to drill a conventional test well for oil. Officially it will only be a horizontal well and have no hydraulic fracturing. Although if they cannot financially justify its extraction conventionally then they do intend to pursue hydrofracking.
The UK does have some onshore oil resources, especially around Nottingham and Sussex. I think there is an on shore well in Singleton is Sussex.
There was a big effort to maximise the UKs onshore oil resources during WWII as ever barrel out the ground here was one less that had to go round the Cape or cross the uboat infested Atlantic.
Sorry random factoids.
The UK does have some onshore oil resources, especially around Nottingham and Sussex. I think there is an on shore well in Singleton is Sussex.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/nottingham/hi/people_and_places/history/newsid_8452000/8452148.stm
There was a big effort to maximise the UKs onshore oil resources during WWII as ever barrel out the ground here was one less that had to go round the Cape or cross the uboat infested Atlantic.
Sorry random factoids.
Similar threads
