The Environment Agency Study (EA) says that setting up thousands of small-scale hydro power plants would be enough to supply 1.5 percent of the demand for electricity in the UK or in other words, sufficient for 850,000 homes.

There were nearly 26,000 hotspots identified along English and Welsh’s rivers. Turbines could be installed at each of these regions to generate electricity through water. However, to avoid damage to the natural environment all the 26,000 hotspot cannot be used. Only areas where there is easy access to the local electricity grid could be used.

Half of the spot could also not be used for the sake of preserving fish habitat. Installing turbines could be damaging while the turbine’s spins, it could practically kill fishes. Sensible environment factors limit the potentials of hydro-electricity.

There are, however, many spots very man has already interfered with the environment according to EA. New sensitive schemes could be adopted to protect the environment and to install hydropower. The construction could be built in a way allowing fish such as salmon to navigate around the turbines. This would provide at least 4000 hotspots where both the local environment and local electricity would be winners.

The best places are along rivers like Neath, Thames, Severn and Aire. The establishment of small-scale hydropower is also supported through government grants and subsidies. This will definitely make green technology such as hydropower much more lucrative.

A new feed-in-tariff for small scale electricity projects is about to emerge in the beginning of April. Establishing medium size projects with an expenditure of £100,000 to £150,000 could likely benefit from a subside of £25,000 as per Environment Agency calculations.

Tony Grayling, who is the head of climate change and sustainable development at the Environment Agency, says that hydropower is a low-carbon source of energy and can have positive effect on wildlife by allowing fish migration. Yet, there are some sites where the risks of harm to the environment are stronger than the benefits.

However, small-scale hydroelectric plants are less harmful to the environment than large-scale projects and are likely to grow in importance for the future. This is why the government is issuing subsidies for small-scale renewable projects in UK.

However, Paul Knight, chief executive of the Salmon and Trout Association says that these small-scale hydropower systems must be designed appropriately. Poorly constructed hydropower system could be devastating to fish in the surroundings.

Source: Guardian.co.uk

Reference: Environment Agency

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Renewable Power, Water Power.

The Feed laws promote renewable energy investments. It allows German homeowners to directly connect their renewable power generated from wind or solar to the national electricity grid. The excess energy produced is refunded by the power company at the prevailing price. This legislation has successfully catapulted Germany to a top position when referring to renewable energy.

Renewable sources produce around 50-terawatt hours of electricity, which accounts for around 10 percent of the yearly requirement in Germany. In the flourishing year 2006, as much as 100,000 solar energy systems were installed in the country.

Progress in U.S
In America, an Energy Bioscience Institution (EBI) has been established by BP. They are examining new and more effective ways to produce bio-fuel for the automobile industry. Around $50 million will be invested into the EBI establishment per year over a decade.

The Energy Bioscience Institute is located at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. BP and the University are partners and ultimately in charge of the research carried-out. Intense effort will be devoted to the area of genetic engineering where more effective bio-fuel crops are expected to be designed.

The EBI will also focus on greenhouse gases. The center will devote expertise to enhance actual technology in order to reduce pollution emitted or even creating pollution-free fuels.

There is some dispute between Geothermal Energy Association (GEA) and the Congress. The GEA’s Executive Director Karl Gawell, considers that both OMB and DOE has unnecessarily stopped the geothermal research program. A hearing in the congress would be necessary to establish the role of this federal research scheme.

According to Gaswell, there have been studies published by the National Research Council, the Western Governors Association Clean Energy Task Force and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which are encouraging expansion in geothermal energy. It is a necessary source of energy to assure that renewable energy reaches a substantial supply to the national grid.

Many of those who support geothermal energy are astounded by the diminutive awareness that the public has concerning its benefits. Geothermal energy is an economically and technologically viable source of energy. Geothermal energy is already per kilowatt-hours cheaper to generate than the natural fossil fuel coal, in US economy.

It is a source of energy present just a few miles beneath the surface. For instance, Ormat, is today amidst the four largest geothermal producers in the American economy. The company operates various plants in a dozen of countries. Moreover, the company is reaping billions of dollars per year, proving that geothermal energy is extremely profitable.

Source: Clean Green Earth

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Geothermal Power, Global Energy, Renewable Power.

The company does already have a geothermal power station at Birdsville but with a limited capacity of only 0.15 MW. The Penola project will be on a much larger scale and the cost to create the well will be around $15 millions. The federal Government’s geothermal drilling program is contributing a total of $7 million for the project.

Information about the region will be further investigated. Near to the township of Penola, it will be easy to integrate the electricity production to the electricity grid. Moreover, if the location appears to be an ideal one, the geothermal power station is expected to grow by as much as 10 times by 2014, according to Dr. de Graaf.

This project is fundamental according to Federal Resources Minister Martin Ferguson who approved the project. He said that in order to reach the target of having 20 percent of total energy supply from renewable energy sources by 2020, geothermal energy is essential. Now, only 8.2 percent of the energy in Australia is harnessed through renewable energy. Moreover, hydropower represents for most of it but expansion capacity is limited in the country.

There will be a need to focus on wind energy. However, to assure a sustainable supply of energy geothermal energy will play a fundamental role. The well at Salamander-q will be of a depth of around 3.5 km to 4 Km targeting a heat of around 150 to 200 degree Celsius.

The project will be fully owned by “Panax Geothermal”; however, latest reports suggest that they are searching to establish a venture with a partner.

Source: Gippsland

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Energy Conservation, Geothermal Power, Renewable Power.

The optimistic perspective of a “renewable economy” might be quite far from reality. The dependency on the traditional fossil fuel sources are dominating the industry of energy supply, and will properly not be superseded within the near future.

The energy consumption in the US has crawled down a bit and many citizens would associate it with the recession. However, the contrary can be equally accountable, the expensive energy prices has squeezed out too much money from the population. This resulted in lower credit abilities to purchase gas, oil and coal, so their demand decreased.

There have been widespread effort to subsidize energy provided by renewable sources such as wind and solar, yet according to U.S Energy Information Administration, they do hardly show contribution to total supply of energy.

Source: Energy Information Administration (EIA); This graph represents, US energy Consumption, and its yearly estimates for 2009 based on data through November.

In the chart, Ethanol is too insignificant to be given a separate representation. It has been associated with other biomass sources such as wood. The binding of both wood and ethanol together does only merely thicken the line.

Renewable Sources Depended on Fossil Fuels

Most of the renewable sources like solar photovoltaic (PV), wind, geothermal and ethanol connoted as renewable sources need fossil fuel to work properly. In this sense, we can consider fossil fuel as extenders. The renewable sources are heavily dependent on our current system especially when referring to biomass. For instance, the production of corn, which is thereafter, converted into ethanol needs tractors, fueled by diesel to work to be grown. Moreover, coal and natural gas is also used to support the production of an ethanol plant. The fertilizers used to fertilize corns are usually imported and uses an oil-based insecticide.

Moreover, wind turbines need to be maintained regularly, requiring some steady sources such as fossil fuel to support the electric system with constant supply. It is also true that solar energy is a onetime cost investment but energy is ethereal; it is absent during the evenings. It is thus, in that case dependent on other more stable sources, which again can be fossil fuel. Otherwise, backup batteries could be used to store energy but these batteries would need to be replaced after a few years.

Fossil fuel is not the most popular term used today but the most reliable and constant technology available to provide energy. In the future, when oil reserves are depleted, the consistency of renewable sources will be challenged at real ground. Yet, there are still many years until such a radical change will occur and new technology might be able to compromise for fossil fuel by then.

Source: The Oil Drum and EIA

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Energy Conservation, Global Energy, Renewable Power.

The minister made some brief facts clear about the provision. The aim is to cut the energy bill. For instance, if Pakistan assured that 10% of total furnace oil and diesel consumed is mixed with biomass energy crops, the country could cut import expenditure by as much as $ 1 billion.

The country is already experiencing a growth in solar energy through widespread use of photovoltaic. The more modern and advanced thin-film solar panels are making solar energy a very competitive source of energy. This is what is accounting for its growth in popularity.

According to the Minister, today Pakistan is strongly dependent on imported energy. This is why the country is inducing project such as increasing domestic production of biomass energy to defiantly avoid high dependency.

The “Fast Track Bio Diesel Production Process” was proposed by School of Chemical and Materials Engineering was titled as the NUST project. This initiative will display a solid step towards going green and will also ensure that eco-friendly crops are harvested.

Moreover, Swati says that the country is at the verge of radical change. The way cars, homes and business are powered are about to be innovated with bio-diesel. Furthermore, the substantial saving of around $1 billion from cut in import of diesel will be redistributed to the public. Socially equitable investment will be done in sectors such as health, national security, education as well as industrial development to secure more employment. The ultimate effect of going for bio-diesel is unfolded.

The economic realities of bio-diesel are not the only benefits. Renewable fuels are more environment-friendly. There will be less air pollution, so clean air will be a byproduct.

Bio-diesel will be a growing and new sector that will empower the economy. However, the minister added that renewable energy technologies like hydropower, geothermal, wind and solar energy will all be welcomed for future expansion. The economic and environmental accomplishment will be targets that will be seen in the near future.

Main Source: The News Pakistan

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Global Energy, Renewable Power.

A wood burning stove could reduce the level of CO2 emission by around 1,000kg per year. It would not only induce a conducive environment but it could become a relaxing activity to watch it burn instead of watching TV.

The major constraint for biomass stove to become omnipresent is the installation cost that it associates. The total installation cost can vary from £250 to £3,000, or even more. An additional cost will have to be added if you are to purchase seasonal logs, which need to be dried.

Overview of Renewable v/s Non-Renewable

The biomass stove can use woods in the forms of waste saw dust, logs and woodchips that have been compressed ignite sufficient energy to heat up. The definition of biomass is yet much broader; it refers to all living things or recently died substances like plant material and even cow dung, which can be used to produce fuel.

Moreover, coal, oil and gas are enveloped in the term fossil fuel. It is used to refer to non-renewable sources of energy as it takes millions of years to form oil reservoirs and so on.

Impact of Biomass Stoves

In simple terms, using biomass instead of fossil fuel would reduce greenhouse gas emission by up to 90 percent. It is tantamount to 1,000 kg of CO2 per year. The biomass used for stoves are also often waste or remains of disposed wood leftover by the timer industry.

There is a setback, if biomass is intensively used it could increase deforestation and thereby counteract on the effort to handle climate change. However, in most countries biomass such as wood is a sustainable fuel as more trees are grown than chopped down per year. In this case, biodiversity is maintained and dwindling effects from deforestation is tackled.

Firsthand Advice to Install Biomass Stove

In order to install a biomass stove a professional must be hired. Before that it is necessary to find a suitable model. For instance a 9 kw stove would provide enough heat to warm a living room. It is also necessary to pick a stove that does not generate air pollution. The most prominent aspect might reveal to be health and safety issues related to the installation and the use of the stove.

In the case, there is a chimney; it should be regularly swept once or twice a year. While using a biomass stove, make sure to not use woods that are painted. Burning of paint or other chemical substances will produce air pollution and is harmful for your own health.

Why People Do not Use Biomass Stoves

There are many people who refrain from using biomass stoves simply because it seems like a pain to light a fire each morning. This could be addressed by installing a complete biomass central heating system but this would turn to be relatively expensive.

The other, push back is that some house structures do not have a chimney. In this case, a flue (a vent) can be installed via the outside wall. This would still leave you with the trouble of finding wood and axe-wielding might not be your preferred hobby. In this case you could buy logs that have already been chopped.

Clean energy is something that has been around for years. A stove can extract around 80% of the heat generated from the fire while an open fire would waste 75 percent of its heat due respective to the wind. Biomass stoves are not a drastic invention; simply a conventional way to stay eco-friendly.

Source: BBC

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Energy Conservation, Global Energy, Renewable Power.

These are solid targets aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emission and to provide more employment. In Germany, the aim is to triple the amount of green energy. In 2005, the renewable energy represented 5.8 whereas in 2020 it is predicted to account for 18 percent of the need of energy.

The German Environment Ministry, considers that renewable energy is a significant pillar for the industry. It will secure employment, reduce effects on climate change and eliminate dependency on imported sources of energy. In America, President Obama is constructively emphasizing on the imperativeness to invest in green technology. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allocated $60 billion for clean energy projects.

Many supporters are echoing the win-to-win situation involved in investing in clean energy. It is the key for construing long-term prosperity as well as recovery. The president of America, Obama has objectively mentioned Germany as a benchmark regarding green investment.

Germany has been supporting renewable energy technology for over two decades already. It has created employment and secured a strong growing renewable sector. However, it has been found that government intervention to assure the success of renewable energy remains primordial. Free market system has previously been unable to assure a viable cost-structure of alternative sources of energy without the support of public funds.

In Germany, the clean tech growth has mainly been in wind energy, photovoltaic (PV) and biomass. These three sources of renewable energy account for 90 percent of clean technology used in the country. Subsidies have accounted for most of the alluring growth. Yet, it is worth the cost as it provides long-term promises, for the environment, economy and for sustainability of energy.

The generous financial support offered by the German government has doubled the quantity of renewable electricity since 2000 up to 2009. The most important sources of renewable energy in Germany is wind and it accounts for 6.3 percent, biomass-based electricity stand for 3.6 percent followed by water power representing 3.1 percent of totally electricity supply. Solar energy in 2008, accounted only for minor 0.6 percent of total energy supply, which is insignificant.

Source: Germany Study

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Photovoltaics, Renewable Power, Water Power.

Nations across the world are collaboratively agreeing to find solutions. The United State of America, China, Japan, 27 nations of the EU, India and Brazil are focusing to solve most of the CO2 dilemma by year 2020. Actions taken are severe and grand in nature.

The 55 developed and developing countries submitting their plan to United Nation Framework convention on Climate Change to curb emission by 2020 were all welcomed on time. However, Russia and Mexico did on their side not submit their report by the end of January.

However, the countries that have already produced their report are officially according to United Nation planning to curb 78 percent of the carbon emission worldwide.

The United Nation accord was concluded at the end of the summit 19th December. Yvo de Boer, the executive secretary of the UN’s climate change office gives an idea of the commitment to tackle climate change. There is an urgency, but countries can still do more, according to the executive secretary.

Enormous measures proclaimed by the countries are according to various analysts insufficient to meet the Central Goal of the Copenhagen agreement. The aim is to avoid global warming which might result in a temperature rise of 3.6 degrees, above what it was in the pre-industrial period.

Alden Meyer, director of Strategy & Policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists says that it is hard to reach the goal before 2020, and technically afterwards as well. More solution need to surface. This includes answers to how developing countries will be provided with financial assistance. Wealth nations are promising $30 billion in short-term support. However, no precise mechanism of distribution has been planned and long-term support remains mere a concept up to today.

The substantiality of the commitment of countries supporting with their report is a gigantic effort indeed. It is the first time ever that collaborative actions are taken by developing countries that are contributing to massive growth in greenhouse emission. They are opting for sustainable development.

Some Facts:
1. China – is aiming to limit its carbon intensity by 40 to 45 percent by 2020 in relation to 2005 levels. This reduction is expected to be on the level of CO2 produced per unit of economic activity, which is a substantial figure.

2. India – Is going for a reduction of 20 to 25 percent of carbon intensity from 2005 to 2020.

3. South Korea – Is also going for a decrease in 30 percent of the carbon intensity emission for the same period (2005 to 2020).

In South Korea, according to the ambassador for climate change, Raekwon Chung, the target was established by the law in December and the government has since then prepared the plan. Two percent of South Korea’s gross domestic product is going to be invested in low-carbon production, new transportation system and higher-efficiency structures. This amounts to a total of $86 billion per year in green energy projects.

In the European Union, across the 27 members, the cut carbon intensity was expected to be 20 to 30 percent for the period 1990 to 2020. In Japan for the same period the target was 25 percent.

President Obama has promised a cut of 17 percent of carbon dioxide emission, in the united state for the period 2005 compared to 2020. However, legislations supporting this goal have not yet been enacted. It is thus not sure whether it is a full or empty promise.

However, Jennifer Morgan, director of the World Resources Institute’s climate and energy program, considers the need to enact climate change legislation before United States, ends up in the lower side of the competition list for low carbon sources of energy.

The commitment of countries like China, Europe, Japan and India are already showing that transparent actions are viable. It is first time ever that actions are being taken at this grand level. Green and clean economies are going to be the next bubble of growth.

Source: New York Times

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Global Energy, Renewable Power.

It is the right time to invest in domestic energy. Going from macro-generation to micro-generation schemes is to some a ‘scam’ as they consider it as a futile strategy to bring down the level of CO2 emission. However, it is not only the green aspects of renewable energy that makes it the right time to invest, incentives offered are making it profitable.

It can be reckoned that investing in renewable energy will bring an immediate 7-10 percent tax-free return. It is a unique opportunity to engage in the growing green sector. However, the government might make 2012 an even better year as they are predicting “pay-as-you-save” scheme for micro generation, in UK. If your main objective is to save and earn money, investing now is a unique chance.

Those who are going for renewable energy for the sake of decreasing greenhouse emission would also properly opt for investing now. The question for them might be more in the technology itself. People who have installed thermal solar panels in regions where the sun is blessing them are certainly delighted. The downfall arises in the case the regions are not blessed, with sufficient sunlight and wind.

In other words, micro-generation technology makes sense only if ‘you’ are located in a region where wind and sun energy is available. It is practically futile to invest if the sources of energy are insufficient to fuel your home.

The real effect of feed-in tariffs for small-scale or domestic energy is yet unseen. There is an economic and environmental outcome. However, will governmental subsidies absolutely contribute to drastic changes in tempting more investment in sources of energy such as thermal solar panels?

The whole investment on renewable technology is relatively expensive. Not only the technology and installation will cost; there might be a need for extensive changes to roof-structure of houses. Integrating solar thermal on rooftops may require re-designing in case the building is inappropriate for photovoltaic integration.

Is it a Delusionary Motive for Environmental Goals

The benefit of going for domestic energy has been enumerated but is it really the best option. Facts, show that if ever the feed-in tariff (government subsidy) was used to invest in larger project the result might have been more rewarding. The incentives offered by the government are likely a mere psychological delusionary motive for environmentalist. People are lured by the feeling of becoming self-sufficient and that they will reduce carbon emission. This is a relatively daunting perception.

The government subsidy’s funds could have been better invested to bring greenhouse emission to much lower levels. There might be a backlash to this very strategy after social cost has been well evaluated

The reality of the feed-in tariff that is expected to be approved on 1st of April 2010 might not necessarily be as glamorous as expected. The term ‘good’ is questionable according to many critics from the Guardian news.

Main Source: Guardian.co.uk

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Renewable Power, Solar Power, Wind Power.

The UK feed-in tariff covers small-scale renewable energy projects. The scheme will certainly help to supply energy to low-income groups as well as giving the poor access to energy.

It is an effort to spread solar photovoltaic (PV) development through the tariff. However, there is still much which has to be reviewed to make sure that the technology will be in reach for low-income groups. The aim of the tariff is to help lower-income groups to lighten their expenses on the electricity bill.

The scheme will also not be restricted to promoting only small-scale wind and solar PV energy. Larger scale project such as community wind projects, river hydro and sustainable biomass generation, would all need a boost through government schemes.

There is already great support from the private sector. Small-scale renewable energy is very important for a country as it helps to reduce carbon emission and minimize energy price fluctuation. Here is a list of some companies and institutions that are encouraging the growth of small-scale renewable energy:

1. Andy Atkins Executive director, Friends of the Earth
2. Stephen Burroughs Chairman, Stour and Vale Hydro Group
3. Anthony Battersby Chairman, Mendip Power Group
4. Julia Craik Managing director, The Premises Studios
5. Ruth Davison Director of campaigns and neighbourhoods, National Housing Federation
6. Rachel Feilden Director, River Energy Networks
7. Gaynor Hartnell Chief executive, Renewable Energy Association
8. Gavin Hayes General secretary, Compass
9. Ray Horwood Chief executive, National Federation of Roofing Contractors
10. Peter Kindersley Neal’s Yard Remedies
11. Ed Mayo Secretary general, Co-operatives UK
12. Derry Newman Chairman, UK PV Manufacturers Association
13. Doug Parr Chief scientist, Greenpeace
14. Jenny Saunders Chief executive, National Energy Action
15. Tim Smit CEO, The Eden Project
16. Dave Sowden Chief executive, The Micropower Council
17. Sarah Webb CEO, Chartered Institute of Housing
18. William Worsley President, Country Land and Business Association

The feed-in tariff is going to enable low-income families to secure cheaper and sustainable energy. The positive aspect of reduced CO2 emission will directly address environmental challenges. Supporting green energy is like hitting two birds with a single stone.

Source: Guardian.Co.Uk

© Jimmy Eriksson for Renewable Power News, 2010. | Permalink | No comment

Add to del.icio.us

Search blogs linking this post with Technorati

Want more on these topics ? Browse the archive of posts filed under Alternative Power Sources, Global Energy, Renewable Power.