Alternative Energy

The Need

Together with water, food and shelter, usable energy is essential to our well-being. Much useful information for this discussion is available from the Energy Information Administration, go to http://www.eia.doe.gov/ or, http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids. A detailed independent analysis, devoid of subsidy and cost complications, has been achieved by Professor Mark Jacobson of Stanford Universty: Review of solutions to global warming, air pollution, and energy security. A somewhat more confusing analysis can be found in the Navigant Consulting, Inc. report to the Florida Public Services Commission and the Florida Governor's Energy Office, in their document "Florida Renewable Energy Potential Assessment" (Draft of November 24, 2008), go to Florida Renewables Assessment (The Navigant Report).

To rely upon fossil fuels (hydrocarbons) for our energy needs is no longer tenable. Increasing demand now exceeds available supplies (referred to as Peak Oil) such that increasing costs can no longer be sustained by any economy. Moreover, the atmospheric pollution from burning of fossil fuels is having an intolerable impact upon the planet that we depend upon for life. Unfortunately, time to harness alternative energy sources means that we will have to carefully execute a transition over a period of time from our traditional reliance upon hydrocarbons to other less harmful and more sustainable sources of energy supply. For the United States the problem is acute as the nation consumes more than 25% of available world oil supplies, while commanding national reserves of only 3% of world oil resources. Almost a half of all oil pumped from the ground is refined into gasoline for consumption in motor vehicles.

One essential feature of a viable alternative energy strategy is the need for portable energy in addition to distributed energy. Currently the electricity grid enables energy to be conveyed to various locations where there is demand for it. Battery technology developments allow for a degree of portability of stored electricity. However, this is not yet a feasible proposition for longer distance travel by motor vehicles, railways, ships or airplanes for either civil or military uses. Some large ships employ nuclear power for their portable energy needs. In some places electric trains take power from an electricity grid distribution system as surrogate for portable fuel. The urgent need is for alternative fuels both for the generation of electricity by the public utility companies, and also for portable supplies for transportation needs.

As of 2004, about forty (40) percent of the world's total energy needs were met by oil, with transportation being ninety six (96) percent dependent upon oil. The moment known as "Peak Oil" when the total amount of oil pumped from the ground in any day can never be larger, and thereafter must decline, is said to be on us, or almost on us, today. Put another way, it is the moment in time when the total amount of oil we can extract from the ground can never equal the ever increasing world demand. With respect to the United States on its own, Peak Oil is past.

Public Citizen, an independent source, promotes increased reliance on wind, solar, and advanced hydroelectric sources of power, and argues that it is technically and economically feasible for a diverse mix of existing renewable technologies to completely meet U.S. energy needs over the coming decades. These technologies can reliably generate as much energy as conventional fuels without significant carbon emissions, destructive mining, or the production of radioactive waste. Public Citizen also calls for increased investment in energy efficiency, particularly in geothermal heat pumps for buildings. Only through aggressive application of existing technologies – and investments in new ones – can the United States make the transition to clean and sustainable forms of energy production that will protect public health, the environment, and move us towards energy independence and improved security. Others suggest that hydrogen can be employed to distinct advantage both for generation of distributed electricity and as an energy carrier for transportation use.

Climate Change

The discussion of Global Warming and the Carbon Cycle illustrates the need for alternative energy sources to be developed which reduce the emissions of Greenhouse Gasses (GHG) and carbon into the atmosphere compared to the burning of fossil fuels. The term alternative energy is often used to include "renewable" or "sustainable" energy and embraces the concept of making more efficient use of traditional sources as well as developing novel means of generating energy, which not only reduce carbon emissions but also reduce the rate of consuming fossil fuels, and so prolong the time before they become seriously depleted and too costly as world energy demands grow.

Electricity generation accounts for more than a third of America's emissions of global warming pollution. Coal fired plants pollute the most, and fuel over half (c.52%) of the nation's generated electricity.

Possible Alternative energy sources

Some of the sources of alternative energy are considered to be:

1. Replacing coal or natural gas fired generation of electricity with nuclear powered generation.

2. Replacing traditional coal fired electricity generation with more efficient coal processes.

3. Harnessing the power of the wind both on land and on the sea to drive electricity generating machinery.

4. Increased hydro electric power generation.

5. Harnessing the power from the sun to generate electricity (Solar power).

6. Harnessing the power in waves to drive electricity generating machinery.

7. Tapping geo thermal energy from deep underground for energy generation.

8. Introducing novel energy efficient building designs to conserve energy, and for whole municipal systems.

9. Utilizing vegetation to produce so called bio fuels to replace or complement burning of fossil fuels for transportation needs.

10. Development of electrochemical processes, for example, hydrogen fuel cells, to increase vehicular fuel efficiencies.

11. Introducing new more efficient vehicular systems such as hybrid of internal combustion and electric systems.

12. Pursuit of increased energy consumptive efficiencies.

Recently attention has become focused upon risen crude oil prices, increasing gasoline costs and inflating costs of food and other commodities, to which items 9 though 12 might be addressed.

According to the Department of Energy, every day of the first four months of 2008 nine percent of U.S. refined petroleum products were exported (1.6 million barrels out of a capacity of 17.6 million barrels a day). This represented exporting more than a quarter of all products actually refined in that period, and equal to half of related petroleum products imported. Every day Americans burn up 20 million barrels of oil, which is what keeps us slaves to OPEC. Commentators point out that creating such "shortages" increases prices to the benefit of Big Oil at the expense of citizens. Furthermore, the oil companies are not starved of home resources, with 36 billion barrels of oil believed to lie on federal land, mainly in the Rocky Mountain West and Alaska, and almost two–thirds accessible or will be after various land–use and environmental reviews. Of the 89 billion barrels of recoverable oil believed to lie offshore, the federal Mineral Management Service says four–fifths is open to industry, mostly in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaskan waters.

Viewed environmentally, it is hard to understand the pressure to increase drilling offshore at this time – except in purely political terms. Especially as new supplies would only become available to affect the market a decade or more hence, and then in quantities too small to make a significant difference.

When considering comparative costs we must take into account both the cost to build the plant in dollars and time measured in terms of output capacity of the the plant ($ per watt), and the price per unit of electricity ($ per kWh – kilowatt per hour) delivered to the consumer. Confusion is induced when plant costs have long since been written down over the time a plant has been in operation. Sometimes plant maintenance costs are omitted. Moreover, costs of fuel converted in a plant to electricity vary, especially as commodity prices fluctuate, as for example with crude oil. There is also the factor of knock on costs both for GHG, and other prices to the consumer of food due to increased transportation costs and commodity costs, when food basic costs are inflated by higher prices paid for a commodity used as fuel rather than food.

Efficiencies.

Increase in consumptive efficiencies is urgently needed to reduce the national demand for energy. Reportedly, increased efficiencies could reduce the national total energy consumption by between 19% and 25%.

Alternative energy applications are in various stages of of implementation ranging from preliminary conceptions to proven installations. The following pages seek to explore some of the issues involved.

Discussion

Writing in the Public Utilities Fortnightly, December, 2007, David Walls , et. al., showed how growth of electricity generating capacity had primarily employed coal until natural gas took over in the 1990s, with a few nuclear plants added in the late 1970s and early 1980s. In recent years, new coal plants had not been favored because of environmental concerns, higher than expected costs of coal, public opposition, and increased construction costs. Attention has been directed recently to integrated gasification combined-cycle coal technology (GCCT), using carbon dioxide sequestration deep underground to control GHG emissions (Florida's geologic structure does not support this option for both safety and cost reasons).

Nuclear-industry advocates have been discussing its re-emergence for years, and several factors would suggest the next energy trend could well be nuclear powered plants. New nuclear plants promise increased energy diversity without air pollutants or greenhouse-gas emissions. Much political capital is being applied and the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) provides an eight year Production Tax Credit of 1.8 cents per kWh for up to 6 GW of new nuclear capacity built before 2021, and the EPAct Title XVII loan-guarantee program helps the industry to obtain affordable financing for nuclear plants. A year later, FS. 366.96 enabled capital costs to be defrayed by charging them to Florida customers in advance. For the Levy County nuclear plants, these charges could raise a steady $233 million each year ( should year by year approval by the FPSC be given, and all customers of the corporation be charged).

A report issued by Moody's on Oct. 10, 2007, highlights risks associated with cost, permit requirements and politics, and forecasts only one or two new nuclear plants will be brought into the power generation capacity mix by 2015. The new plants proposed for Levy County are reported to be a $17 billion project (CC Chronicle Sunday November 23rd, 2008). An FPSC study estimates electricity to cost 12.97 cents per kWh from such a plant. The Solar Energy Industries Association estimates electricity from a utility sized Concentrating Solar Power plant to cost 8 cents per kWh (cheaper by 38%).

In recent years, renewable energy has become the fastest growing source of new power-generating capacity in the United States. The wind power market in particular has shown tremendous growth, increasing at an average 24 percent annual rate between 1997 and 2006, with total generation capacity at 9,149 MW in 2005 and 11,603 MW in 2006. Several factors are driving renewable energy growth, including declining installation costs, available financial incentives (e.g., federal production tax credits), the high cost of competing construction and source fuels, and significant interest from private investors looking to provide equity and debt financing for renewable energy projects. Also, terrorism threats to nuclear waste and LPG transit and storage facilities are avoided.

The future U.S. power industry may find itself heavily reliant on natural gas and renewable energy. Under most scenarios, these technologies offer the lowest risk and are likely to face the least opposition.

Conclusion

This is perhaps best viewed through the lens of the introductory words and conclusions drawn by Professor Jacobson in his paper, reproduced below: