Global Warming May Cause Colder Winters

According to some new research done using computer models, global warming may actually cause colder Winters in the northern hemisphere.

It's been common knowledge in the scientific community that climate change will cause some strange local effects but this tops them all.

More details here.

8th Warmest October On Record

The combined global land and ocean temperatures for October 2010 made it the 8th warmest on record, 0.54C above the 20th Century average.

The period January to October 2010 was equal warmest on record (despite the cooling effect of La Niña).

More here.

The Future Of Energy Part 2: Wind Power

In part 1 of this series, I made a case for reducing our dependance on fossil fuels as much, and as soon, as possible. In the rest of this series I'll be looking at ways this might be done.

This time round I'll be talking about the role wind power might play.....

Current State Of Play
By the end of 2009, wind produced 2% of the world's electric, double what it was just 3 years earlier.

It provided 20% of the electricity in Denmark, 14% in Ireland and Portugal, 11% in Spain,  8% in Germany, 3% in the UK (with plans to have 15% by 2020), and 2.4% in the U.S.

Worldwide the 5 biggest producers are, in descending order, the United States, China, Germany, Spain, and India.

Ironically, Texas, the oil state, is also the U.S.'s leading state for wind power. It has more than double the UK's output, and if it were a country, it would rank 6th in the world!

Currently, the world's biggest offshore windfarm is off Kent, UK, with 100 turbines. This will soon be dwarfed by 'farms being built and planned elsewhere.

Offshore windfarms are costlier to build than land based, but the extra cost is offset by an improved supply.

Worldwide, the rate of growth in wind power is accelerating with dozens of countries investing heavily in the technology. However, because fossil fuel demand is also growing, wind may only provide 8% of all electric by 2018.


Pros and Cons
Wind energy is plentiful, clean, renewable, available almost everywhere, and creates no greenhouse gases.

However, it is currently more expensive than other, more established ways of generating electric. Well, it is new technology, and like all new tech, the cost is still coming down steadily. So the comparison isn't particularly fair.

Another issue is that you don't have control of the supply: The wind may drop off when you need it most, or be blowing a gale when you don't want it. But electric grid operators are used to meeting varying demand for electric on a round-the-clock basis. So they don't consider varying supply to be a problem, as long as it's part of a balanced mix of sources and wind makes up no more than 20% of the overall supply.


The Future
As I've said, costs are coming down steadily and wind will become increasingly competitive compared to the established technologies. I'd hope that this will mean that wind will be contributing more than the forecasted 8% of the world's electric by 2018.

However, there's that 20% upper limit to consider - Since wind energy is so intermittent, it may be uneconomical to manage beyond this point - So wind could only ever be part of the overall solution.

Looking further into the future, high altitude wind power (HAWP) shows promise. It is based on the fact that, the higher you go, the stronger, steadier and more persistent the wind gets. Traditional turbines wouldn't be able to exploit this, but things like tethered kites and balloons could. That might sound a bit....low tech, but there's some serious money chasing this one and, it's claimed, HAWP can out perform the current generation of turbines, both in terms of cost and output.

Early MARS Prototype From Mageen

There are several companies developing HAWP, including Joby, Mageen, Drachen, KiteGens, and Makani. Most seem to be at the concept or prototyping stage but Mageen are looking to roll out their MARS rotary balloon system to remote rural villages in India next year. Commercial applications still seem to be a few years away but we appear to be seeing the beginnings of a revolution.

                                  -- oOo --

More information about wind power here.

More about HAWP here.

Leading Businesses Want Low Carbon Economy

A report from business leaders in the UK and India has recommended that the two countries work together to build low carbon economies.

The companies involved include Rolls Royce, HSBC, and Marks & Spencer. They believe - based on their own experiences - that businesses can be sustainable and profitable. If this were extended to entire enonomies it would help to "combat the impacts of rising energy prices, enhance energy security and reduce the risk of human induced global climate change" and it "increases resource efficiency, productivity and competitiveness, and leads to the creation of high quality jobs across a range of sectors".

So there you have it: Hard-nosed CEOs saying that we can cut carbon, be sustainable, and not ruin the economy!

The report was aimed at the UK and Indian governments, and both have reacted very positively, recognising the huge potential for jobs, growth, and environmental protection. The UK Environment Minister Greg Barker saw such a bilateral collaboration as a means to demonstrate to the rest of the world that moving to a low carbon economy was "compatible with continued economic growth". In his opinion, that was the only real issue holding back the success of climate talks.

Well, what are you waiting for, Mr Barker? Time to get things rolling.

More background here.

The Future Of Energy Part 1: Fossil Fuels

We are hooked on fossil fuels.

We currently consume around 4 billion tonnes of coal, and 3000 billion cubic metres of natural gas annually, and 86 million barrels of oil per day. The result is around 30 billion tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.

Furthermore, demand for all 3 is predicted to increase by around 2% per year until 2030. So, in the absence of a worldwide climate change agreement, carbon emissions are set to increase by about 40% over the next 2 decades.

Of course, all this assumes supply continues to meet demand. And, in the case of oil and gas, this is by no means certain. If demand for oil did outstrip supply, it would be disastrous for the world economy because we are completely dependant on a cheap, plentiful supply.

Then there's the matter of energy security. Countries need to protect themselves from sudden price hikes caused by natural disaster (e.g. Hurrican Katrina), political instability (e.g. in South America, Middle-East or Russia), and profiteering from the likes of OPEC.

Finally, there's the looming problem of climate change. The world is getting warmer (See here) and, whether you believe we're the cause or not, adding these vast quatities of known greenhouse gases to atmosphere can't be helping matters.

So, for all these reasons, we need to urgently increase our efforts to find replacements and get them scaled up in time to meet those challenges.

We also need to stop subsidising oil and coal, and improve energy efficiency.

The ultimate aim is for the demand curve for fossil fuels to first level off then fall steadily to more acceptable levels. The sooner we can do that, the better.

Time To Stop Subsidising Fossil Fuels

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has called for governments to stop subsidising the price of fossil fuels.

It said in it's report that some $312bn are being spent this way, most of it from developing nations. This doesn't even include the subsidies to the oil companies themselves (estimated at another $100bn).

If we did away with them, the IEA say, the rise in fuel prices would result in global emissions cuts of around 5.8%. The subsidies undermine the competitiveness of renewables, hold back more fuel efficient technologies, and speed up the depletion of scarce resources.

Some of the developing countries involved claim that it makes energy more affordable but, the report says, very few schemes actually benefit the poor. In fact, the subsidies have "traditionally been granted to politically-connected industries with close links to politicians".

Time to stop this practise and use the money elsewhere. Renewables for instance.

More here.

Free Solar Panels - Things To Consider

Whilst looking around on the web for reviews of companies offering free solar panels, I came across this.

It's a consumer guide to micro-generation. It's particularly useful for anyone thinking of having free solar panels installed, including a check-list of things you should be asking. It's written for the UK (by Consumer Focus) but it might be worth a look by those outside the UK as some of the points it raises would apply almost anywhere.

Climate Change: The Geological Society Chips In

As a geology graduate, I've long been aware that there's much to be learnt from the geological record about climate change. The wealth of evidence not only allows geologists to work out what's happened in the past (and why), but, by comparison, it also lets them figure out what could be in store for us in the coming decades.


This report, which is only 7 pages long (plus 6 pages of references and recommended reading), summarises the Geological Society's position on climate change in layman's terms. Well worth reading.

Success At Nagoya

Good news at last! Two weeks of biodiversity talks in Japan have just ended in success. It was touch and go for a while but, after the timely intervention of Japanese government, agreement was finally reached between 190+ countries. 

The agreement covers 20 goals to be achieved by 2020 and include:

• Cut the rate of loss of natural habitats, including forests, by at least half
• Increase terrestrial nature reserves from 13% to 17% of the world’s land area
• Increase marine and coastal nature reserves from 1% to 10% of the world’s seas
• Restore at least 15% of the areas where biodiversity is classed as ‘degraded’
• Safeguard at least 75% of threatened plant species in collections

If they're fully implemented it would be a big step towards us handing over a viable planet to future generations. That's a big "if" though. So far we've not had a good record on these sort of agreements: All the Kyoto signatories are likely to miss their carbon cutting targets come 2012 (some by miles); and the 2010 biodiversity targets have been failed miserably.

So, all we can hope is that the world's governments have finally got the idea. This is no longer simply a 'green issue'. This is way bigger than that.

Will Cutting CO2 Send Us Back To The Dark Ages?

It's a frequent claim of climate sceptics that we will all somehow be plunged into the Dark Ages if we attempt the sort of emission cuts that will be necessary to stop climate change.

There's rarely any attempt at explaining these claims, it's just left there, as if it were a given.

So, I'll attempt to fill in the blanks for you. I think they're trying to imply that we'll all be forced to live a simpler, low tech life to achieve the sort of cuts required. No TVs, cars, planes, mobile phones, PCs etc etc.

If that's what the sceptics are driving at, then, as usual, they are mischief making.

Yes, if we were to ban the use of oil, coal and natural gas tomorrow, or attempted to remove 80% of emissions by the day after, we would be in trouble. But that's not going to happen is it?

What we'll actually have is a lengthy period of transition from the dirty fuels of the past, to the cleaner fuels of the future.

It'll be a period in which:

• The efficiency of the things like solar panels, wind turbines, and biofuels, will be massively improved.

• Other, known technologies like tidal and wave power, ground-source and air-source heating, and Concentrated Solar Power will come to prominance.

• Further technologies will emerge thanks to greater investment (Some really interesting ones are already at the experimental stage).

• The huge subsidies handed out to the oil and coal industries by some countries can be switched to renewables.

• Companies worldwide can become more energy efficient and therefore save costs (e.g. The container ship industry, which is set to contribute 3% of all emissions in the future, has identified a number of ways it can save fuel and therefore CO2).

• Collectively, we will need to learn to recycle everything to preserve scarce resources and save energy. Everything from household rubbish to sewage to discarded electronics.  

• Manufacturers will reduce the amount of packaging they put on their products and ensure what's left is recyclable.

• Governments will encourage widespread micro-generation (where homes produce some or all of their own energy using solar power etc.).

• Carbon capture and storage is likely to become widespread, perhaps converting the CO2 into limestone which can be used for building materials and so on (we have a pilot scheme going on here in the UK).

These are just some of the likely highlights. Together they will cut emissions massively whilst continuing to meet our growing energy demands. Anyone who doubts that under-estimates human ingenuity.

But, I suppose you may be asking: Why bother at all? Why go to all that expense?

Well, leaving aside the potentially disastrous consequences of climate change, we'll have to do much of this anyway when oil and natural gas start running out.

Estimates of when demand for oil will exceed supply (known as Peak Lite) vary considerably, but it's inevitable. These resources are not unlimited afterall. So it makes sense to prepare sooner rather than later, in case peak lite is only just around the corner, because that would be economically disastrous.