Links related to future energy debate:
David Mackay has recently become adviser to govt on energy matters. I bought his book a few months ago and thought it was really good, still do, and it got me thinking about energy choices and investigating some areas not really examined before like the heat pumps. It is a good starting point to consider plans. I like that it makes an attempt at comparisons by breaking down amounts of production and consumption into per person per day energy usage, to try to get things to add up. But I believe it has some flaws. He says he is discarding economics often, but then at points makes conclusions that depend on him making (mistaken) economic assumptions. He does not take into account many of the practicalities & costs of transition, starting from where at now. But that is not to say not good to have vision of where want to get to and be concerned to make it add up in final form. But there is need to have efficient bridges to get to final vision.
The thinking behind one of his plans of several for energy production, Plan E for economics (page 211), which he says would be result of free market with carbon tax is mistaken as does not take into account lots of factors such as variable cost of capital, technological trends and inertia, the effect of govt ‘picking winners’ (or not) and creating a market on costs. Although I would be guessing too on any plan I would propose, even if I would try and bring in economic, practical and environmental factors to more refined level. There are many variables and many hard to quantify, and much contested. At end of day there needs to be some plan that adds and move forward with urgency on it.
I think his idea of big need for pump storage is spot on, sure bet that this will be need both for expansion of wind and useful with expansion of nuclear.
He sees Carbon Capture and Storage as only a stop gap. But one reason to develop it is is if ignored then market will mean others will just burn the carbon saved elsewhere anyway, so best to develop for future use worldwide.
But his general point that we have start saying yes to change in big way is right.
Seems to move towards some sort of detail and ambition that is required.
Also yet to examine fully this report, although have seen other stuff from Greenpeace and others with that push to localise initiatives local mixes often starting with community Combined Heat and Power, as well as big push for offshore wind, which looked promising but seem to have stalled.
All good plans including above have energy use reduction by efficiency at top of list as most cost effective use of resources.
This Week in Nuclear podcast
Cheerleading nuclear. Some good points, and some overblown. A good listen at times anyway.
Video presentation on Thorium
There are several video presentations on Thorium, all super upbeat, with interesting history of why not chosen path.
Thorium for the long term, will supersede uranium if depletion becomes a limit.
Liquid Salt reactor with continuous processing for less waste per unit of energy, as can covert all the fertile material to fissile and use it all up as alternative to solid nuclear fuel where lots is left over, is interesting, but pie in sky for now, where as evolution of present designs more viable for the near term.
While I find the solid, liquid to gas classification a bit overstretched and enters the almost metaphysical (if not plain wrong), this book does make a good case for the gas bridge to a cleaner future particularly in U.S. in chapters that focus on area of expertise of author, such as gas deposits found in contrast to oil.
meanwhile in the U.K. there more efforts to get non-gas households connected up see links below:
more fuel poverty links below
Building energy solutions:
Energy efficiency, transition & Fuel Poverty:
North Edinburgh Trust
in my area recently launch Net Your Carbons project.
Read your Meter website to record electric, gas and water meter readings, to produce usage graphs over time. Dig out those old bills and put old reading on to see trends.