Power Source 4 Share

Bloomberg reports that South Korea is looking to build a new tidal power plant in Jindo - South Korea Plans 200-Megawatt Tidal-Power Plant by 2016.

South Korea plans to build a tidal- energy plant on the southern tip of the peninsula by 2016, saving an estimated 330,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions a year.

South Jeolla province signed an initial agreement with Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEP), Korea Midland Power Co. and five other companies to build the 200-megawatt plant in Jindo, the provincial government said in an e-mailed statement without giving cost estimates.

Chris Nelder has a post at Smart Planet on the baseload fallacy and the path towards 100% renewable power - Why baseload power is doomed.

The grid’s architecture developed in a fairly ad-hoc way. As the country was built up, more generation capacity was added, and the grid was extended. Technologically speaking, most of the grid is old and “dumb”: Power gets generated somewhere, and transmitted somewhere else, but there is very little in the way of sensors, storage buffers, switches, or security mechanisms along the way. It’s more like plumbing than an iPhone. This is why it was possible for one overloaded transmission line in Ohio take down much of the grid in Ontario, the Northeast and the Midwest in the blackout of August 14, 2003.

Grid operators have one overriding, fearsome task: They must maintain enough supply from this very complex system, within a narrow range of frequencies and voltages, to meet constantly fluctuating demand at all times. Therefore they tend to be risk-averse, preferring to stick with what they know to be reliable, and avoiding innovation.

Enter renewables

Before the advent of renewables, generating power was a pretty straightforward task: When demand increased, you just added more fuel to an engine. With renewables, the task is reversed: The engines (wind turbines and solar collectors) ramp up and down of their own accord, and grid operators must adjust to accommodate their output.

The growth of renewables in the U.S. has been driven primarily by state Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) requiring a certain percentage of power to be generated from renewables by a certain date. According to an April 2011 MIT report just released this month, 29 states have RPS mandates which typically require 15 to 25 percent renewables by 2015 to 2025. Many of these states mandate that grid operators give the renewably-generated power priority, so when wind generation spikes, for example, they must ramp down other generating units. In other areas of the U.S. and in parts of Europe, operators may instead curtail peak production from renewables to accommodate their baseload generation—for example, forcing a wind farm operator to furl their blades or apply brakes to their turbines.

The baseload fallacy

The notion that renewables cannot provide baseload power is really an artifact of the way the grid and its regulators have evolved. If all generators were able to ramp up and down on demand, and if grid operators were able to predict reliably when and where the sun would be shining and the wind would be blowing, accommodating any amount of power from renewables would be no problem.

A 2010 study called “The Base Load Fallacy” by Australian researcher Dr. Mark Diesendorf, an expert on integrating wind into power grids, fingers the “operational inflexibility of base-load power stations” as the main obstacle to further integration of renewables. “The renewable electricity system could be just as reliable as the dirty, fossil-fuelled system that it replaces,” he observes, if demand were more efficient and intelligent, and supply were made up of a wide variety of renewable sources plus a small amount of gas-fired capacity to cover the peaks. The perpetrators of the baseload fallacy, he argues, are mainly the industries who benefit from the status quo: coal, oil and gas companies, the nuclear industry, power generators, and industries who depend on them like aluminum and cement manufacturers.

Claims that renewables could never generate more than a few percent of grid power without taking down the grid have been given the lie by the real-world experience of areas that deliberately adapted their grids.

The best example in the U.S. is Texas. By virtue of having its own grid (technically, an “interconnection”), it is generally outside the purview of federal regulation by FERC. The entire grid is operated by a single ISO, ERCOT, so it has a lot of control over its generation mix and grid planning. Texas decided long ago to pursue its wind potential vigorously, and now has the largest installed wind capacity in the States at over 10 gigawatts (GW).

On March 7, ERCOT used a record 7,599 MW of wind power, constituting 22 percent of the load and representing over 77 percent of its nameplate wind capacity. The previous day it had met 24 percent of the load with wind. Baseload proponents had said that such levels of integration were flatly impossible. But ERCOT had made it possible with the help of a new modeling tool that analyzes real-time conditions every half-hour, giving grid technicians greater ability to match generation with demand and control transmission more discretely. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory has found that if other grid operators adopted similar tools, over one third of U.S. power could be generated from renewables.

All that ERCOT needed to accommodate more wind power was some sensors, a better flow of information, and better modeling tools. As the MIT report notes, the hardware to provide better grid information already exists, but few operators have employed it in their control and dispatch operations. The obstacle is not technology, but “the industry’s culture of resistance to new and experimental projects.”

That’s not a problem for China, however. The MIT report mentions that China is piloting a program that will allow it to monitor the national grid in real-time and control it automatically. The system eventually could allow China’s grid to uptake a far greater percentage of renewably-generated power than the antiquated and obsolete U.S. grid can, although the former is still the world’s top consumer of coal for power generation.

Another 2010 study by the German Renewable Energies Agency turned conventional baseload logic on its head, finding that due to their relatively inflexible ability to adjust to changing demand, “nuclear power plants are incompatible with renewable energies.” To meet forecasted wind production in Germany, conventional baseload operation would be cut in half by 2020, assuming renewable generation continues to enjoy priority dispatch. As renewables gradually replace conventional baseload capacity, only more flexible gas generators that can operate at under 50 percent of their capacity will still have a role to play.

The European example

Europe serves as another model of why good grid planning and management are key to integrating renewables into the grid. If baseload proponents were correct, then we would expect the countries with the highest levels of renewable penetration to have the most trouble in managing their grids, but the reality is quite the opposite.

A comprehensive new report on renewables integration by European consultancy eclareon GmbH surveyed the policies and grid functions of the 27 member states of the European Union, and found that “large quantities [of renewable generation] can be effectively managed on the grid.” Countries that planned for adequate grid capacity generally didn’t have a problem with accommodating renewables, and unsurprisingly, those are the same countries that have pushed for more renewable generation.

Solar and wind generation as a percentage of electricity consumption in 27 European Union countries in 2010 (first bar) and 2020 (second bar). Grid integration designated by color: green = positive, yellow = neutral, red = negative. Source: RES Integration Final Report, eclareon GmbH.

Countries where the share of renewable power is greatest—Germany, Denmark, Spain, Ireland, and Portugal—offer “positive conditions for grid operations,” although some barriers to integration were identified, including the potential for curtailment in Germany, challenges to priority dispatching in Ireland, and strict distribution parameters in Portugal. Identified barriers for grid development in those countries revolve around public policy issues, permitting, regulatory regimes, cost distribution, and the obligation (or lack thereof) of grid operators to beef up their grids to accommodate more renewable power.

Ripe for innovation

The real issues around the integration of renewables into the grid have to do with human arrangements, not technology. As the MIT report concluded, “There is a clear need for a statement on national goals for the electricity sector to streamline the US regulatory structure, which currently is complex and fragmented.” We need smart policy, and an intelligent approach to planning the grid of the future that is not simply beholden to the vested interests of the status quo.

This will run directly at odds with the free-market ideologies that have brought us this far. As the EU project THINK observed, “the main shortcomings of the conventional regulatory framework are that grid companies have disincentives to innovate.” A firm regulatory hand, like that in the most renewably-powered countries of Europe, will be necessary to integrate more power from solar and wind onto the grid.

Renewables should be able to meet at least 20 percent of electricity demand without disrupting the grid just about anywhere in the world with good grid planning and management. As geothermal and marine power technologies mature, they will become a much less intermittent, natural substitute for the baseload technologies of the past. A host of other technologies will even out the bumps in renewable generation by adding storage (batteries for distributed storage, and pumped hydro and solar thermal for utility scale); increasing the connections between grids (allowing better transmission between sunny and cloudy, or windy and still areas); and transitioning to on-demand natural gas-fired peaking generators. Over the next decade, the current assumptions about the need for traditional baseload capacity will begin to fade as new storage, interconnection, and smart grid management strategies come into play, and ultimately, a combination of these technologies might raise the limit on renewables to 100 percent.

The Korea Herald reports that a swathe of nuclear power plants have been cancelled or delayed in South Korea as part of the anti-nuclear backlash following the Fukushima disaster (and the Inchon tidal power project has been delayed for 3 years as well) - Plans for more power plants delayed or scrapped.

The construction of 10 nuclear power plants and one tidal power plant scheduled to be completed between 2013 and 2027 has been either put off or canceled, plant operators said, fanning concerns about power shortages.

The 11 plants, if completed, altogether could have produced about 12.7 million kilowatts of electricity, which accounts for about 6.4 percent of the nation’s power supply.

“We have postponed or canceled some plant construction deals because the government has become more careful about giving out approval after the Fukushima nuclear disaster,” said an official of the Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Co.

Nuclear plant Sinuljin-1 and Sinuljin-2, originally set to be completed in June 2016 and June 2017 respectively, had their completion date postponed by at least 10 months, after failing to obtain the government approval on time.

The completion date of Sinuljin-3, Sinuljin-4, Sinkori-5 and Sinkori-6 were postponed by one year for failing to obtain the state approval, and Sinkori-7 and Sinkori-8 construction projects were canceled as the company faced difficulties in securing land for the construction site.

The KHNP decided to put off Incheon tidal power plant by about three years to June, 2020, the officials said.

The Climate Spectator has an interview with the CEO of wind power company Vestas - Which way will wind power blow?.

By nearly any metric, 2011 has not been a particularly good one for Vestas, the world’s biggest wind turbine marker. Lower than expected demand for wind turbines, and fierce competition from rivals, particularly in Asia, has pushed the company to a third quarter loss and forced it to abandon its long-term financial goals – its so called Triple15 plan of €15 billion in revenue and an EBIT margin of 15 per cent by 2015. The outlook – clouded by the sovereign debt crisis in Europe, a slowdown in wind turbine development in China, and the likely removal of a crucial tax credit in the US – has helped push its shares down 55 per cent in the year and nearly 90 per cent from their 2008 peak.

Vestas CEO Ditlev Engel, however, says that the best days of wind are not over. In an interview with Climate Spectator, Engel says the Danish company can match the Chinese (and says it already sells more turbines in China than the Chinese sell outside of their country), and will play a critical role in future energy needs.

Engel says Australia has a magnificent wind resource which is as valuable as the resources that lie in the ground. But it is unlikely that Vestas will consider reopening the wind place and nacelle assembly plants it closed a few years ago.

He also says gives his views about technology development, and how the youth of today will have a different approach to energy than the current generation. ...

GP: You also face immense competition from Asia, particularly from Chinese wind companies. I guess to guarantee your long-term future you’ve also got to make certain of your short-term future as well. Are you confident you can match the Chinese?

DE: We have to remember that Vestas has 3000 colleagues in China and we went into China in 2006 and we built a number of plants there. That means that if the rules of the game going forward, for instance, are that everything should be used in China and shipped around the world, Vestas can definitely do that as well. Now, because of the magnitude of the products, but also, of course, the transportation costs, etc, etc, we don’t think that’s really going to happen. But actually, if you add up the numbers, if you look at 2010, Vestas sold more megawatts in China than all of the Chinese combined sold outside China.

GP: If you can’t beat them, join them, as it were.

DE: Well, China is of course the world’s largest wind market, but if you look just here in 2011, I think we have already seen that the Chinese market has not grown to the level that it had done in the previous year, so I would say it’s getting into a more a normal stride now going forward than the very steep road that we saw just over the last few years. ...

GP: Where do you think growth in the wind market is going to be? Is it going to be in onshore or is it going to be in offshore?

DE: In Australia, you guys have so much land, so since it is much cheaper to install them onshore instead of offshore, then I’m sure that onshore is going to be the name of the game in Australia. And you also have to remember that the onshore wind resources you have in Australia are phenomenal. I mean, again, a lot of people know that you have a lot of resources in mining and so on and so forth. Having fantastic wind resources onshore as you have in Australia is as good for the future economic security as having a lot of resources in the ground and you just have them up in the air as well, but people don’t think about it this way.

GP: Sure. Can you tell us about the size of the turbines of the future? Will they continue to just get bigger and bigger or will there be…?

DE: I don’t think so. From a transportation, cost efficiency point of view, I think we are at the peak now. The turbines we are sending for Macarthur are called the V112 which is I think sort of the largest we are going to see. And for practical reasons, shipping reasons, transportation, I think we are at the edge, now, onshore. I think we’re going to get bigger and we have for offshore; we have a launch that’s a seven megawatt turbine, but that is so large that it has to be manufactured at a port very close for installation, so if you’re going up in that scale, you need to have a significant offshore market just around the corner like, for instance, we have in the UK.

So, I think we are at the peak now, and because of the cost of materials, the lighter you can make the design, the smarter you can make the design and thereby reduce the consumption of materials, the more you can lower the cost of energy. So, in the old days it was about, you know, making them just bigger and bigger. I would say going forward it’s about keeping them at this size and then keeping making them lighter, because that will keep on checking out the total cost of the manufacturing.

This Is Cornwall has an article on yet another plan for a tidal power project on the Severn Estuary - North Devon perfect site for £240m tidal barrage power station.

The barrage would be 1,200 metres (three-quarters of a mile) long and would run between Northam Burrows and Braunton Burrows. A road bridge would run along the top of the barrage, which Mr Apps claims would halve the travelling distance between Bideford and Braunton as well as alleviate congestion.

The project would cost between £200 and £240 million and would be a public-private partnership. Mr Apps said the project would largely be supported through European funding as well as from private investment.

The barrage would consist of eight or nine variable pitch turbines which would produce between 88 and 100 MW. In total the scheme could power up to 72,000 homes – more than twice the number that Fullabrook Wind Farm powers.

Arabian Business News has a report on the spiralling consumption of oil in Saudi Arabia for power generation - Saudi to boost crude burn for power generation in 2011 .

Saudi Arabia, the worlds top oil exporter, will step up its use of crude for power generation in 2011, Saleh Alawaji, the countrys junior electricity minister, said on Thursday, as the nation balances use of a new oilfield against obligations to oil cartel OPEC.

Saudi oil industry figures showed the kingdom estimated direct use of fuel for power generation to rise to 540,000 bpd this year from 403,000 bpd last year.

"Our main sources are crude oil and natural gas, and the new expansion of power plants this year will use more crude oil," Alawaji told reporters on the sidelines of an industry conference in Singapore.

Using more crude to generate electricity allows the kingdom to utilise fresh output from a major new oilfield while holding firm to its OPEC commitments to curb exports. ...

CRUDE BURN: Saudi Arabia, the worlds top oil exporter, will step up its use of crude for power generation in 2011 (Getty Images)

CRUDE BURN: Saudi Arabia, the worlds top oil exporter, will step up its use of crude for power generation in 2011 (Getty Images)

Saudi Arabia, the worlds top oil exporter, will step up its use of crude for power generation in 2011, Saleh Alawaji, the countrys junior electricity minister, said on Thursday, as the nation balances use of a new oilfield against obligations to oil cartel OPEC.

Saudi oil industry figures showed the kingdom estimated direct use of fuel for power generation to rise to 540,000 bpd this year from 403,000 bpd last year.

"Our main sources are crude oil and natural gas, and the new expansion of power plants this year will use more crude oil," Alawaji told reporters on the sidelines of an industry conference in Singapore.

Using more crude to generate electricity allows the kingdom to utilise fresh output from a major new oilfield while holding firm to its OPEC commitments to curb exports. It also helps the kingdom meet stricter environment rules.

Power generation capacity in the kingdom is likely to grow by about 6 to 10 percent this year, while installed power generation capacity, which now stands at 50 GW, would grow to 77 GW by 2020.

Peak power demand for the summer in 2010 was 45,000 megawatts (MW), he added, versus 41,000 MW in 2009.

Although sitting on the worlds biggest oil and gas reserves, Saudi Arabia is struggling to keep pace with rapidly rising power demand as petrodollars have fueled a region-wide economic boom as well as rapid population growth.