A compelling analysis (which I first read soon after publication) of the variety of possible means of future energy production is provided by Eric Jeffs (2012) in his book Greener Energy Systems: Energy Production Technologies with Minimum Environmental Impact. It should be mentioned that throughout the book Jeffs repeatedly reveals that he is somewhat sceptical of anthropogenic climate change, and so although he does concede that it is at least possible that man-made climate change is a reality, his motivations in favouring various means of energy production should be sternly questioned. Nevertheless, his expertise in the field of energy production, and his absolute mastery of the technical detail with respect to the competing merits of different methods of energy production, cannot be contested.
In his analysis of the best options for sustainable future energy production, Jeffs is direct and unequivocal in his firm belief that nuclear power provides the best means to reliably increase generating capacity while reducing (and eventually eliminating) emissions of GHGs. Jeffs repeatedly emphasises that nuclear fission is, at present, the only available means of energy production capable of delivering generating capacity comparable to present fossil-fuel based methods without contributing to GHG emissions. He is cynical with regard to many renewable energy sources (chapter 9 of the book is entitled 'The fallacy of renewables', but is particularly scornful of wind power, citing both the 'enormous amount of materials required even for one 3.7 MW wind generator offshore, and the energy cost of installation of assembly, as compared with a nuclear plant of 1100 MW' and the 'susceptibility [of wind power stations] to a wide range of wind speeds' (p.213). He is particularly scathing of the environmentalist movement, or 'green anti-nuclear fanatics' (p.122), and their role in continually frustrating the development of nuclear power in the industrialised world. In his final analysis, Jeffs concludes that nuclear energy should be complemented by hydroelectricity, combined-cycle natural gas and what he terms the three 'predictable' renewables (solar, tidal and biomass) to provide sustainable energy production in the future. He also argues that the potential applications of nuclear energy go beyond simply producing electricity, arguing that emissions from global shipping could be eliminated through the use of nuclear-powered merchant ships, pointing to nuclear-powered warships presently in service with the navies of several countries, which are valued for their speed, reliability and ability to spend long durations at sea with no need to refuel.
Overall Jeffs presents a persuasive (if one-sided) argument in favour of nuclear power. His reasoning that nuclear energy (complemented by other reliable, low-emissions energy sources) is the only realistic means of reducing GHG emissions, while increasing energy supply, is pragmatic and constructive. However, his deep scepticism of wind power should be called into question. Jeffs argues that the materials required to build wind farms on a commercial scale is prohibitive:
"When the first phase of the London Array [wind farm] is complete... it would produce 1931.8 GWh/year. The nuclear plant further up the coast at Sizewell... contains less steel and copper than is required to build one of the London Array wind generators, and... would produce 8897 GWh/year... the biggest problem with wind is the enormous quantities of materials required for a relatively small output." (p.211)
While it is true that wind energy requires a relatively high volume of materials per unit of output, this does not prevent it from being an economical energy source. The average cost of wind energy across several onshore projects is now approaching that of conventional fossil-fuel based methods, or around €50 per MW/h, compared to €49 for coal and €41 for natural gas (Busby, 2012). Moreover, it is estimated that, for power stations coming online in 2020, the total life-cycle cost of energy from wind power will in fact be less (at USD $73.60 per MWh) than that for nuclear power ($95.20 per MWh) (USEAI, 2015). Finally, it has also been demonstrated that wind power can provide a formidable proportion of total energy supply - in Germany, for instance, as of 2011 the states of Saxony-Anhalt, Brandenburg, Schleswig-Holstein and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern derived from wind power 48.11%, 47.65%, 46.46% and 46.09% of their total energy consumption respectively (Molly, 2012).
In summary the argument that nuclear power must constitute a significant component of future energy production is compelling. Indeed, the UK government has enthusiastically endorsed new nuclear generating capacity as a means of meeting the country's commitments on emissions reductions:
"...we must completely de-carbonise the power sector and we need nuclear to do that. Why? Because nuclear is the only proven technology that can be deployed on a sufficiently large scale to provide continuous low-carbon power... our own analysis tells us that decarbonisation of the power sector can be achieved most cheaply, securely and reliably if nuclear remains a core part of the UK's energy system"
- speech by HM Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Rt. Hon. Andrea Leadsom MP, to the 8th Nuclear New Build Forum, April 2016 (Source: GOV.UK, 2016).
However, even if nuclear power should be wholeheartedly embraced over the coming decades, it is widely recommended that it constitutes only one part of a diverse energy mix, working in tandem with other sustainable or renewable energy sources in order to maximise zero-emissions output and achieve energy security (ANSTO, 2009).
References
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) (2009), The nuclear option as part of a diverse energy mix, Sydney: ANSTO
(link: http://www.ansto.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/45169/energy_diverse_mix_June09.pdf)
Busby (2012), Wind Power: The Industry Grows Up, Tulsa: Penwell
GOV.UK (2016), Realising the vision for a new fleet of nuclear power stations (https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/realising-the-vision-for-a-new-fleet-of-nuclear-power-stations; 03/11/2016)
Jeffs (2012), Greener Energy Systems: Options for Sustainable Future Energy Production, Boca Raton: CRC
Molly (2012), Status der Windenergienutzung in Deutschland, Wilhelmshaven: DEWI GmbH
(link: https://www.wind-energie.de/sites/default/files/attachments/press-release/2012/jahresbilanz-windenergie-2011-deutscher-markt-waechst-wieder/statistik-jahresbilanz-2011.pdf)
United States Energy Information Administration (USEIA) (2015), Levelized cost and levelized avoided cost of new generation resources in the Annual Energy Outlook 2015, Washington, D.C.: USEIA
(link: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/archive/aeo15/pdf/electricity_generation_2015.pdf)
No comments:
Post a Comment