Thursday, 4 July 2019

Hydrogen Production for Heating and Hot Water to Buildings, using CCuS, at a cost of £47.70 billion per annum FOREVER.



 The UK uses 875 TWh of natural gas each year (30.2 + 285.5 + 559.2)



The cost of manufacturing hydrogen from Natural Gas, with CCuS in Europe is US$2.3/kgH2.



1 kg of Hydrogen has an Energy Content of 33.33 kWh/kg



It would be necessary to manufacture 26.25 million tonnes of Hydrogen each year.
(875 TWh ÷ 33,330 kWh/tonne)

At US$2.3/kgH2 and an exchange rate of £0.79/US$, that works out at:
£47.70 billion per year.

Assuming the Steam Methane Reforming plant and the CCuS infrastructure is operational by 2025, what's the cost?
By 2050, that's £1.2 trillion.

Then there’s the cost of transmission and distribution that will need to be paid for and added to this. And finally, not forgetting the profit motive for all of those ‘green energy’ pension fund holders – that will need adding too.

So for the average UK household, using 12,000 kWh of natural gas each year, the cost of just manufacturing the hydrogen would add £654 per annum to bills – then add the cost of getting the hydrogen to your house and a bit of profit for those environmentalist investors and it’s going to be the best part of another £1000 pa. That will come out of lifestyle choices for every family, and then all we’ll have to worry about then is:

 Getting our roofs modified:

“…Hydrogen collects under roofs and overhangs, where it forms an explosion hazard; any building that contains a potential source of hydrogen should have good ventilation, strong ignition suppression systems for all electric devices, and preferably be designed to have a roof that can be safely blown away from the rest of the structure in an explosion…”



Monday, 27 May 2019

A very poor month for wind power - July 2018. £472 billion in Batteries to meet the average.

The cost of batteries to raise the electricity shortfall, during one month of low wind, to the annual average.

July 2018 - told in 3 pictures:




THE ONLY 'AFFORDABLE' ENERGY STORAGE TECHNOLOGY TO BACKUP INTERMITTENT RENEWABLES IS THAT ENERGY STORED IN  THE CHEMICAL BONDS OF NATURAL GAS!

AKA: CCGT POWER PLANTS!





Thursday, 14 March 2019

The 100% UK Low-Carbon Electricity Gold Medal Goes to Nuclear - £65 Billion for 60 Years.


But what about 100% low-carbon electricity from wind and solar power with backup?

The UK uses 340 TWh of electricity every year. It is unthinkable that the German-ification of our landscape and near-shore seascape, from wind and solar farms, could be forced upon us here in the UK.

A reasonably 'sensible' choice of wind and solar might be:
Solar PV 10%; Onshore Wind 30%; Offshore wind 60%

Solar PV would cost £86 billion to generate for 60 years:

Onshore Wind would cost £115 billion to generate for 60 years:

Offshore Wind would cost £276 billion to generate for 60 years:

Fossil-fuelled CCGTs are used to backup renewables. At peak times of demand, regular periods of low wind and solar conditions need some 60 GW of CCGT capacity to guarantee supply. CCGTs would cost £50 billion to generate for 60 years:

100% UK Low[ish]-Carbon electricity generated from wind & solar + backup for 60 years, tots up to:
£527 billion.

That is 8X the cost of 100% Low-Carbon electricity generated from nuclear power for 60 years:

8X the cost for renewables! Why? 
IT'S VERY SIMPLE: 

18X to 30X the use of precious materials and resources; massive use of fossil-fuelled energy every step of the way, from mining/quarrying, through transport, processing, manufacture and installation.

For those of us who love our countryside and seashores, we risk the horrors of a sorry reality: 1000X the scenic desecration, ecosystem destruction, species wipe-out and landfilled polluting and toxic waste-mountains.

Claire Perry, the Minister of State for Energy and Clean Growth, has mandated the Committee for Climate Change [CCC], chaired by Lord Deben, to dictate the technological path to meet a ‘Zero Emissions by 2050’ target. Beyond Hinkley Point C, 'New Nuclear' virtually disappears from the mix.

Proof, if proof were needed, that the CCC is manifestly pro-renewables/anti-nuclear. Its Chair, Lord Deben, tainted by his family links to financial income from bio-fuelled [i.e. renewable technology] Drax Power Station.

Philip Hammond' £1 trillion is well short of the cost of 100% decarbonisation via the CCC route. That £527 billion to decarbonise electricity can be increase threefold to decarbonise heating and hot water to buildings and decarbonise much of the transport sector.


Under £200 billion to do all of that using advanced nuclear - over £1.5 trillion using renewables:£1,500,000,000,000. 
Who pays? Every year, over the 30 years to 2050, that would be £2,000 per household.

Ignoring passively-safe, advanced nuclear power plants to get our nation 100% decarbonised by 2050 will drain family finances, crush our lifestyle choices and degrade the environment out of recognition.
And it's the young members of all of our families who will pay the price.

Hydrogen Production for Heating and Hot Water to Buildings, using CCuS, at a cost of £47.70 billion per annum FOREVER.

  The UK uses 875 TWh of natural gas each year (30.2 + 285.5 + 559.2) UK Natural Gas Flow Chart 2017 [2nd Page] The cost o...