Technology Idea of the Week

"All I've heard from you lot so far is a lot of hot air, so in the interests of climate change: you're fired!"

A classic Lord Sugar quote from the BBC series The Apprentice (top on liners blog). Nice to see a acknowledgement of environmental change as well! Business plan competitions have become quite a major event for entrepreneurs over the last few years and are a great way to get a head start in business, unless of course you make a fool of yourself on The Apprentice. The CleanTech Challenge is a competition run by University College London and London Business School which looks for ideas which provide a "sustainable environmental benefit". So for this weeks tech innovation I am going to look at the 2013 winners of the CleanTech Challenge. 

The Power Window - Delft University of Technology 

• A luminescent foil is placed over a glass window
• The foil absorbs photons of light and scatters them towards the edge of the window 
• Solar panels around the window frame absorb the light and generate electricity
• The students at Delft University of Technology developed a new material which helped improve the efficiency of this process by a factor of five
• For more information check out the Delft TU Website or CleanTech Challenge. There is also an interesting video on the subject, link is posted below. 

A Solar Concentrator developed by MIT, similar to the Delft Invention

Delft TU Power Window YouTube Clip

It is really interesting to see the variety of business plan competitions that are focused on finding technological solutions to environmental and energy challenges. What is also interesting is that often these competitions are organised and funded by large engineering or energy companies as well as by research institutions. I think this is a really positive move for the green movement: by making it a business opportunity you can guarantee peoples interest and investment to make real change. I look forward to see what ideas come out of the competition this year! 

Bye bye birdie

Wind power: one of the main potential sources of renewable energy and is particularly important for a country like the UK. It is also quite contentious, here are some of the reasons why.

Main Advantages 

Turbines have a very small footprint on the land so can be used as part of integrated land use schemes. For example having turbines amongst cropfields, which is common practice in Denmark. Farmers invest in wind turbines and have responsibility for maintaining them, in return the energy they generate can supply the farm and go back into the national grid (Vermeylen, Renewable Energy, 2010). This is becoming a more popular approach in other countries such as the UK with many projects like Community Windpower in North Cornwall. 

Wind turbines are also relatively cheap to maintain, even though the initial cost of the turbine is relatively high compared to other renewable. This is really important in allowing grassroots projects because local stakeholders can invest in a project and therefore gain some benefits from it. This is a benefit for land based wind farms however the costs are considerably higher for offshore. Cost of the foundations is just 6.5% for land based turbines but it is 34% of offshore projects (Horgan, Renewable Energy, 2013). The energy payback time for offshore wind farms is much higher but the potential for energy generation is also higher.

UK offshore wind farms - Telegraph December 2013

Main Disadvantages

Disruption to communities and wildlife due to the visual impact and noise produced by the turbine is one of the biggest arguments against them. This can impact an ecosystem and species biodiversity for example the wind farm in Vagsoy in Denmark is located near a coastal cliff where sea eagles nest. There have been many reports of eagles colliding with turbines and the eagle population in the area has declined over the last few years (Rygg, Energy Policy, 2012).

Wind farms can also impact the local economy and tourism which is a big source of controversy. The Lindesnes region in Denmark attracts over 80,000 tourists a year for outdoor pursuits, fishing and its natural beauty. There were many concerns about the expansion of a wind farm, the environment manager for the wind farm stated in an interview that "we are a little afraid of ruining the image that Lindesnes lighthouse and the area have, by overloading it with too many turbines. This has been the main objection against having more [turbines]; it is related to tourism." (Rygg, Energy Policy, 2012).

Wind turbines are not restricted to rural environments. A particularly embarrassing example of poor project planning and management is the Strata Tower in London. The tower (also called the razor) makes a distinctive impression on the skyline with three turbines in the top. They were meant to generate 8% of the buildings electricity but after complaints from residents about the noise and vibration produced by the turbines they have been switched off since 2010.

The Strata Tower, London  - image courtesy of The Guardian
A failed renewable energy project

In conclusion, wind farm still has a long way to go in regards to winning over public opinion. Offshore wind farms have the biggest potential for energy generation and a reduced impact on wildlife or communities. The disadvantage is the high start costs which require big investors. For now it seems that small, community based projects will lead the way until we can train birds not to fly into turbines.

Technology Idea of the Week

Digging Deeper - The Deep Sea Gold Rush

Okay so this post was meant to go out two weeks ago but I have been defeated by blogger! So this is the tech idea for a couple of weeks ago and I will do another post this week with a new energy idea.

Hydrothermal vents located at ridges on the deep ocean floor were discovered in 1977 and our understanding of them is still fairly limited. They are home to a completely unique ecosystems: the microbes at the base of the food chain make energy by oxidising hydrogen sulphide which is produced by the vents (Lutz et al, Nature, 1994). This is fundamentally different to the production of energy by photosynthesis using carbon dioxide which sustains the vast majority of life. The vents sustain a variety of life including many organisms which cannot be found anywhere else on earth including giant tube worms (Riftia pachyptila) and the yeti crab (Kiwa hirsuta) - NewScientist, June 2011.

Riftia pachyptila - 2m long tube worms on the East Pacific Rise
Image Courtesy of NOAA Blogs

Kiwa hirsuta - the hairy legged yeti crab! Costa Rica.
Image Courtesy of MarineBiologene Blog

Shortly after the initial discovery of the vents, researchers began to investigate the mineral deposits located around them. There are significant concentrations of gold, silver, copper, zinc and manganese: all highly profitable minerals which many mining companies would be keen to exploit. 

There are many concerns from the scientific community about the effects on the endemic speices if exploration goes ahead. Many different articles have been published since the discovery of the mineral deposits about this issue. Halfur and Fujita, Science, 2011 argue that the disturbances to the ocean floor could release plumes of toxic chemicals that would damage the vent ecosystem and could have a widespread effect on ocean geochemistry. An editorial in Nature, 2011 also raises the issue about the direct impact on endemic species due to destruction of habitat and disturbance from mining operations. This is of particular concern because we know very little about the ecosystem and therefore cannot predict the impact we may have on it. Finally, there is huge concern about effecting the ecosystem because it has been suggested that these vents could be the location of the earliest life on Earth (Sousa et al, Royal Society, 2013). The environmental conditions around the vents could act as a proxy for the environment of the early earth therefore organisms around the vents could help us investigate the origins of life. If mining has a detrimental impact on these ecosystems it could damage biodiversity and scientific research. 

Bluewater Metals and Nautilus Minerals are two mining companies that are leading the way in mineral exploration in the Pacific Ocean. In 2011, Nautilus Minerals was granted a 20 year lease by the Papua New Guinea government to mine the Solwara 1 region in the Manus Basin (Dover, Nature, 2011). They are currently still investigating the area and predict that commercial production of minerals could begin as early as 2016 (BBC, 2013). The UN has just began to put together a framework for managing mineral extraction and licensing mining companies. This is managed by the UN International Seabed Authority. This map shows the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in the eastern Pacific which is currently being managed by the UNISA. There is estimated to be a total of 27 billion tonnes of mineral nodules (BBC, 2013). It is a little hard to see - here is the link to the full size image http://www.isa.org.jm/files/images/maps/CCZ-Sep2012-Official.jpg

The regions of the Clarion-Clipperton Zone
UNISA 2013

The key take away messages from the map are that the green striped areas represent the protected zones and the other colours all represent the licensed areas of different mining companies. It shows just how complicated the licensing in international waters and how close the environmental zones are to exploration areas. Very careful management is needed to preserve the ecosystem, maintain biodiversity and help continue scientific research into the origins of life. Mining of hydrothermal vents seems inevitable and I am more than a little concerned about its impacts on these extraordinary environments.

An interesting campagin group if you want to investigate further - Out of Our Depth

Merry Christmas!

A very merry Christmas to everyone and I hope you all have a wonderful day with family and friends. We have been suffering from power cuts and I am incredibly relieved to have the electricity back on at the moment. Fingers crossed it says that way!

As a little bit of entertainment for Christmas evening, how about some modern alchemy? Here is one of the Christmas Lectures from the Royal Institution in 2012. What happens when you burn a diamond...

Merry Christmas everyone!

Introducing Renewables

The next focus section for my blog is going to be on renewable energy, this will include a variety of different energy sources which have essentially unlimited supply To start off, just how much does renewable energy contribute to the global energy market?

Renewable Energy Share of Global Energy Consumption 2010

Figure 1 source: Renewables 2012 Status Report, page 20

Figure 1 Summary

• Fossil fuels (80.6%) - coal, oil, gas
• Traditional biomass (8.5%) - burning of wood primarily for cooking and heating
• Modern renewables (8.2%) - divided into hydropower, biofuels, heating and power generating, currently the 'heating' sector is significantly larger than power generation. 

Average Annual Growth Rates of Renewable Energy Production 2006-2011

Figure 2 Source: Renewables 2012 Status Report, page 21

Figure 2 Summary

• Over the five year period between 2006 and 2011, production of all energy types has increased. 
• Growth of the Solar PV cells is significantly higher than any other category in 2011 (74%) and over the five year period (54%).
• The main increases over the past five years have been in: solar PV, solar thermal power, biodiesel, ethanol production and wind power (total = 144% increase)
• Hydropower has seen a very minor increase over five years (3%) but it is one of the biggest contributors to the renewable market.

Oil - Final Thoughts

To summarise this focus section on oil I am just going to do a quick recap of the information I have looked at and make draw some conclusions about what part oil will play in supplying energy over the next few decades.

Opportunities for oil production 

• Increasing population growth and wealth means that the demand for energy is continuing to grow. Data from Allianz predicts that the global population will reach 9 billion by 2050. Furthermore, research by Stanford University predicts that global energy demand will continue to rise from 80 billion barrels of oil in 2020 to 100 billion barrels of oil in 2050 (Changing the World's Energy Systems, Stanford, 2012).  
• Developments in drilling technology allow oil companies to explore previously inaccessible reservoirs of oil. This includes deepwater locations such as in Asia and Arctic environments (Oil Developments, 2013 Summary). In addition, advancement in ground imaging are also really vital in locating previously unknown deposits (CGG, Seismic Overview). 

Threats to oil production

• Growth of other energy industries such as coal and development of new energy industries such as hydraulic fracking and renewables have increased competition for oil producers. A lot of research suggests that for many locations, outside of the OPEC countries, peak oil production occurred between 2000 and 2005. This is mainly because the price of an oil barrel tripled from $35 to over $100 making it less competitive (Kerr, Science, 2013).
• Increasing regulation of oil production also increases the price per barrel, further reducing the competitiveness of oil. Disasters such as the DeepWater Horizon and increasing public awareness of the threat to the environment in areas such as the Arctic mean that governments are looking to invest in other energy sources where possible (Huber, Economic Geography 2013). Emphasis on the "where possible"!

Conclusions...

Oil will continue to play a significant part in our energy supply over the next century, despite growing adverse public opinion and enthronement impacts. Improvements in drilling and seismic imaging will allow companies to tap previously inaccessible resources and governments will continue to support oil companies while the price remains competitive. I agree with the wealth of data that suggests that we have already reached peak oil production and that the increasing cost per barrel will be the sole determining factor in the demise of oil production.

Digging Deeper

Deepwater drilling has become economically viable over the last decade as oil prices have increased. There are a number of different issues companies have to address when drilling in deep water sediments and in my next post I am going to look at some of these in more detail. For a quick introduction to the process this animation demonstrates it quite nicely.

Technology Idea of the Week

Any Londoner will recognise that huge feeling of relief when you step into an underground station, escaping the winter weather the wind and rain of winter. That warm rush of air and being huddled down in seat without worrying about the outside world. This poster from 1927 captures this emotion beautifully, artist Fredrick Charles Herrick (1927).

Courtesy of Tony's Toy Shop
Artist: Fredrick Charles Herrick, 1927

The underground generates all of its own heat simply by the equipment, volume of people and being insulated at depth. A fact that is appreciated in winter as the temperature is kept around 20 degrees Celsius but is not so popular in summer where temperatures can reach over 30 degrees (WIRED, 2013). 

Popularity of the underground in the UK and many other countries raised the question of whether we can use the excess heat generated and put it to better use. Over the last few decades many groups and organisations have been established to investigate this potential. Here is a quick overview of how these plans are actually getting of the ground (or under it rather) in Islington. 

The Council of the London Borough of Islington have teamed up with the Mayor of London, Power Networks and TFL to invest £2.7 million in a heat capture system. This heat will be used to supply 700 homes with the potential to increase this to 1200 in another two years (Islington Council). It is estimated there will be a payback time of 10-15 years (Business Green). This is a little vague, largely because this is one of the first projects of its kind so research is limited. 

This is a cheaper and greener source of energy although it isn't technically classed as renewable. It is part of a government initiative to use 'secondary heat sources' and is really important in reducing fuel poverty (Buro Happold 2012 Report).

The use of secondary heat sources is being investigated by many other cities such as Cologne and Rotterdam (NewScientist 2013). It is pioneered by Celsius City is an EU collaboration who state that there is "enough heat produced in the EU to supply the EUs entire building stock, there just isn't the heating network to distribute it". If these plans are successful and continue to be implemented we could see a huge reduction in heating bills and energy consumption: a huge challenge facing mega cities today. 

Oil and climate change

The International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has the responsibility of collecting information on climate change and presenting it to policy makers. This has a big impact on energy policy, particularly relating to the use of fossil fuels and release of greenhouse gases. The 5th IPCC report was recently published and it makes some bold statements about carbon dioxide and global warming. At the very start of the report it states that:

"Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia." 

IPCC, Summary For Policy Makers, 2013, page 2

The report then goes onto make statements about the drivers of climate change stating that "The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since 1750" (IPCC, page 11). In addition to this it says that it is "extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming" (IPCC, page 15). This is largely based on research into climate forcing, research from Hohne et al 2011 demonstrated that the observed global warming could not have been produced by natural climate forcing: it requires the additional anthropogenic CO2 to produced observed changes. This is supported by many other research groups such as the Tyndall Centre and the Met Office. Finally the report goes on to warn policy makers about the effects on carrying on with business as usual. 

"Continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all components of the climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions."

IPCC, Summary For Policy Makers 2013, page 17

The recommendations from the IPCC, which represents many climate change research groups, is that is we want to reduce the rate of global warming: we have to reduce carbon emissions. Research into the impacts of global tipping points suggests that changing atmospheric composition is a major driver of biodiversity and ecosystem change, even if the impact is gradual rather than abrupt change (Brook et al 2013, Trends in Ecology and Evolution). Therefore, to reduce the impact on biodiversity, climate change and ecosystems we should reduce CO2 emissions. In 2010 32% of global energy supply came from oil, even though this has reduced from 1973 where 45% came from oil, it is still a hugely substantial figure (IEA, Energy Statistics, 2012). So despite extremely convincing evidence about the impact of CO2 emission from oil, it could be several decades before we see a significant reduction in global oil production.   

Technology Idea of the Week

This week: is there a future for methane fuel cells? Methane hydrates have featured quite a lot recently while I researched for my posts on Arctic natural resources and in Anson Mackay's lecture on the crysosphere. It seemed deserving as this weeks technology focus!

Fuel Cells - A very brief introduction! 

• Convert chemical energy into electricity by an oxidising reaction
• Require a constant fuel supply 
• The ideal fuel is hydrogen because it doesn't produce greenhouse gases but the technological challenges in its cost and storage mean this currently not viable (Steele, 1999, Nature)
• Currently, the best fuel options are hydrocarbons (methane) and alcohols (methanol).  

Methane Hydrates

• Methane hydrates (clathrate) are crystalline solids composed of a mixture of water and light natural gas (methane, carbon dioxide, ethane). They are found in the shallow lithosphere (<2000m deep) where the surface temperature is less than 0 °C (Kvenvolden, 1993, Review of Geophysics)
• There are substantial natural deposits of methane hydrates in deep ocean sediments, permafrost and under frozen lakes. It is estimated that the global volume of methane hydrate is 10¹⁵ to 10¹⁷ cubic metres of methane which represents 53% of all fossil fuels ((Demiras, 2010, Energy Conservation and Management). The distribution of organic carbon can be seen in the image below. 

Distribution of organic carbon on earth (excluding kerogen and bitumen).
Source: Demiras, 2010, Energy Convservation and Management)

Advantages of Methane Fuel Cells

• Substantial deposits - it is estimated that the global volume of methane hydrate is 10¹⁵ to 10¹⁷ cubic metres. Deposits are found in widespread geographical locations including US permafrost, Lake Baikal in Siberia and Arctic sediments. (Demiras, 2010, Energy Conservation and Management)
• Low carbon energy - methane is a less carbon intensive fuel than coal or oil: it produces approximately half the amount of CO2 than coal for equivalent volumes. This can be seen the equation below. Therefore using methane hydrates as an energy source could help reduce anthropogenic emissions of carbon dioxide which may contribute to the greenhouse effect. 

Top equation - the combustion of coal. Lower equation - the combustion of methane hydrate
Source: Demiras, 2010, Energy Convservation and Management)

The Challenging side of Methane Fuel Cells

• Location and access - finding the deposits requires high level seismic imaging, we do not have detailed enough resolution for some deposits. In addition the deposits often cross national boundaries or are in international territories. This raises a lot of geopolitical issues in terms of researching the site and rights over the resources. (Kvenvolden, 1993, Review of Geophysics)
• Extraction - the gas can expand 160 times its volume as it is brought to the surface and is de-pressurised. This can cause explosions and leaks of methane gas (CH4) which contributes to the greenhouse effect. We currently need to do further research into drilling technology to ensure safe extraction of methane hydrates. (Demiras, 2010, Energy Convservation and Management)

It is possible...

In March of 2013, a Japanese drilling company successfully produced gas from frozen methane hydrates from the ocean floor. For equal volumes, this deposit holds 164 times the energy of conventional gas (NewScientist, 2013). The deposit is in the Nankai trough and could be a game changer for Japan's energy supply. Investigation into methane hydrates was fast tracked by the Japanese government after the Fukushima nuclear power disaster. Here is a film of the methane hydrate extraction in Wellington by a team of German Scientists (the video is in English)! 

In conclusion, methane hydrates could be a really important step in meeting our energy needs over the next 100 years. The ultimate goal still remains as the production of commercially viable hydrogen fuel cells. 

Oil vs. Petroleum and Arctic Follow-Up

In this focus section on oil I have been using oil and petroleum pretty much interchangeability. I thought it might be good to just clarify the definitions of them (source US Energy Information Administration).

Crude Oil: a mixture of hydrocarbons that exist as a liquid in natural underground reservoirs and remain as a liquid when brought to the surface.

Petroleum products: produced from the processing of crude oil in petroleum refineries and the extraction of liquid hydrocarbons from natural gas.

Petroleum: a broad category that includes crude oil and petroleum products.

After the section on Arctic Oil I did a few days ago, I wanted to do a quick update on the subject. As countries get ready to stake their claims on the Arctic as the glacier retreats what will the impact be on the natural environment? Research by Smith and Stevenson 2012 suggests that by 2040, ships maybe able to cross the Arctic directly: hugely reducing shipping costs for companies. This diagram shows the change in shipping for Open Water ships (blue line) and Polar Clash ships (red line). The later are better able to deal with pack ice therefore can cross closer the Arctic.

Smith and Stevenson 2006, PNAS
Shipping routes for hypothetical ships across the Arctic Ocean. Note that this shows 'medium-low' radiative forcing (RCP 4.5) The scenario for RCP 8.5 allows even easier access for shipping through the Arctic. 

So which ever scenario you take, shipping through the Arctic is going to become more commercially viable for a lot of countries along with the access to natural resources. Untapped resources are estimated to be about 10% to the global amount of oil and gas (USGS, 2012). I think I would be feeling sad if I was this seal.

Image courtesy of seppo.net

Oil Trade Routes

The global trade of oil is big business. Each year, BP carries out a Statistical Review of Energy and the image below shows the global trade of petroleum in 2010 in millions of tonnes.

Source: BP Statistical Review of Energy 2010

To help visualise this a little clearer I found this diagram which uses the data produced by the BP review to draws arrows, where the thickness represents the level of trade. Oil barrel symbols are imports, Pumpjacks (nodding donkeys) are oil exports.

Source: Visual World Website

Oil - TED Talks

The focus for the last few posts has been about investigating the world of oil. I wanted to just share this great video by Richard Sears who does a fantastic overview of oil and its part in the energy supply.

If you are interested in more similar talks check out this playlist put together by TED Talks including information of nuclear power, fossil fuels and renewables: TED Talks The End of Oil

Technology Idea of the Week

Green slime! Who says that renewable energy can't be attractive. I think there is something uniquely beautiful about the bright green fields of algae at the Parabel (formally called PetroAlgae) site in Florida.

Parabel HQ in Florida - courtesy of Parabel

Using algae as a biofuel instead of crops hit the news a couple of years ago and I wanted to catch up with what has happened since.

Extensive research into Algae took off in America during the 1950s and 60s. This was largely driven by concerns over a food supply crisis but researchers soon began to discover the other possibilities that algae offered. A paper by Weiss, 1952, Scientific American highlighted the potential as a food source, fertilizers and possibly a fuel. Further research into methane production from algae by Meier, 1953, Agriculture Journal was discussed at a solar energy symposium and the interest in algae grew.

However for the next few decades, efforts to use algae as a biofuel on an industrial scale were pretty stagnant. This can be largely linked to the economical viability of algae compared to fossil fuels and the interest in nuclear energy. The 1974 Energy Review carried out by Nature mentioned solar, wind, nuclear fusion and natural gas (Nature, 1974) but as Dr Umakantha of Karnatak University pointed out: it failed to mention algae (Letters to Nature, 1974).

Not until the last few years has research into algae as a biofuel really gained support again. We can probably link this to two key points. Firstly, the price of oil has now increased over $100 a barrel (Oil Price International) and is reaching the point of becoming commercially not viable. Secondly, the pressure on governments to meet carbon targets continues to grow (UN Conference on Climate Change, 2013). So why isn't everyone growing green energy?

Challenges to Industrial Scale Production of Algae - Summarised from (American Chemical Society, 2009)

• Space - algae require light to grow so you need a high surface area which is expensive
• Sunshine - constant bright sunshine is needed for high level growth rate required to make farming algae viable. Fine if you are in California but probably not in London!
• Strains - there are more than 3000 different strains of algae, understanding which are the best for energy production and how to cultivate them is still not fully understood. 
• Systems - a lot of research has been carried out into the algae themselves but much more R&D is required into the processing systems on larger scales
• Species Invasion - keeping the algae ponds free of invasive species or unwanted algal strains is challenging

Is there a future for algae? 

There is a growing of investment in algae. Investment by big chemical companies such as Chevron and Dow Chemicals in algae research facilities has dramatically increased in the last decade. For example in 2009 BP invested $10 million in Martek Sciences Corporation (Mascelleri, Chemical Journal, 2009).

There is a lot of research into alternatives uses of algae. The University of Bath has produced research into using algae to clean water (Scott et al, 2012). This could help improve efficiency and reduce carbon consumption of water treatment plants. 

There is still a potential for using it as a fertilizer on a wider scale. Algae can be up to 30 times more productive than oilseed crops such as palm and soy (Gabel, 2012). Therefore its potential as a food source, animal feed or fertilizer could be very significant in the future. 

Arctic Oil - The Final Frontier

Natural resources in the Arctic could play a vital part in global energy production and particularly in petroleum. A study by the United States Geological Survey in 2012 estimated around 66 billion barrels of oil and 240,000 billion feet of cubic gas (USGS, 2012). To put this in context, global consumption of oil in 2012 was 89 million barrels a day (EIA website) which means that the Arctic oil reserves alone could supply entire global for 2-3 years.

Who owns the Arctic: who owns the resources?

The Arctic is an ice shelf (not continental shelf like Antarctica) therefore it is governed by the Law of the Sea (United Nations, 1892). The waters around it are divided up between countries which have a shoreline in the Arctic ocean and countries can claim the right to water and any resource deposits up to 200 nautical miles of the coastline of the Arctic (Popular Mechanics). The map below shows the territorial claims in 2012. So now we know roughly who owes which area of the Arctic Ocean and that there are significant oil and gas deposits. So why haven't countries been exploiting these already? 

Arctic Territory Claims 2012 - NOAA, Arctic Strategy, 2011

What are the challenges in extracting resources?

• Climate - low temperatures, long periods of total darkness and challenging topography. The extreme climate will effect equipment, personnel and therefore the efficiency of the process. This is largely linked to tolerance levels for electronic equipment and cement structure in the well (Villar et al, 2000) 
• Infrastructure - there is presently very limited infrastructure or supply chains which would be required for oil and gas extraction. This adds to the cost of the process and environmental risks. For example the nearest back-up clean up equipment for American projects would be 2000 miles away in Seattle (Forbes, 2011). 
• Competition - the recent boom in natural gas from fracking operations is currently a much cheaper alternative to businesses. Both America and Russia are investing heavily into gas exploitation at the moment therefore less investment in Arctic Oil exploration (EY Arctic Report 2012)
• Spills - containment and recovery from oil spills is a unknown factor in Arctic conditions. Boxall 2012 argues that a spill is inevitable and that the potential effects on the local environment could effect global climate and food chains. The lower temperature also reduces bacterial activity therefore the oil from the spill would remain for a much longer time. 

The underlying theme to all these challenge is the climate of the Arctic. Reduction in summer sea level ice in the Arctic over the last few decades is now raising concerns about a potential 'resource rush'. Earlier this year the United Nations Environment Programme stated in the UN Yearbook 2013 that the Arctic needs better protection. 

"The rush to exploit these vast untapped reserves have consequences that must be carefully thought through by countries everywhere, given the global impacts and issues at stake."

Achim Steiner, UNEP Executive Director (Reuters, February 2013)

Ellis et al 2011 discusses human influence on the environment and the impacts it can have. The potential loss of species diversity and change to natural environment are definitely a concern for the Arctic. The impacts of change to this environment could have huge influence on global climate, ecosystems and food chains so it is vital we manage the resources in this area with great care.

Update on Chernobyl

A few weeks ago I did a focus section on Nuclear Power, recently there have been some developments in Chernobyl which I feel are important to include so this is just a quick break in the discussion about oil.

At the beginning of November, work began on the Chernobyl site to remove the ventilation stacks which are 75m tall and weight around 220 tonnes (World Nuclear News, 5th November). The aim of this is to allow the construction of a shield over the site to contain any future radation links. The first ventilation stack has been successfully removed and the construction of the shield has begun. The 110m high shield is also enough to hide a football pitch and will be a oppressive feature on the landscape (BBC News, 27th November).

The arch so far

First part of construction of the arch - BBC News

This is one of the most ambitious engineering projects in history and is aiming to finish in 2015. The challenges in construction have been enormous, before you even start considering the radiation levels and risk to workers. The reactor (which exploded in 1986) is still far to reactive for people to work there for significant periods of time so the arch is constructed at another site and then transported on rails to the site (VINCI Construction).

A model of the final structure - aiming to be complete in 2015

The final construction - Novarka

Once completed the shield should contain any future leaks and protect the surrounding area: finally allowing the population to move on more from the disaster. It does raise the question of what is a reasonable level of risk to take and is Nuclear Power a step too far. There is still so much we don't fully understand about the effects of disasters such as Chernobyl and Fukushima that the response to them is limited.

Oil - A Brief History

IPCC Report 2012

Petroleum is the biggest energy source globally in the world today (IPCC). It played a part in the industrial revolution although coal was the dominant energy source. From the 20th century onwards and throughout the Great Acceleration is seen by many as the key for fuelling society (Ruddiman, 2012). Industrial production of oil created cheaper energy, increased fertilizers and fuelled construction. Everything that makes the modern world! 

It interesting to note a few key dates in the history of oil summarised from World History of Oil

450BC - Herodotus described oil pits near Babylon

1500s - Oil from seeps in the Carpathian Mountains in Poland was burned in street lamps to provide light in the Polish town of Krosno

1836 - For the first time, academician G.I. Gessi researched Absheron natural associated gas from a scientific point of view and defined its composition.

1803 - Offshore oil extraction reported in Bibi-Heybat Bay of the Caspian Sea (Azerbaijan) from two hand-dug wells 18 and 30 meters away from the shoreline. The first offshore oil field ceased existence in 1825 when a huge storm ravaged all wells in the Caspian

1818 - In southeastern Kentucky another salt well produced oil. It was known as the "Beatty Well," named after the owner of the land on which it was drilled (Shepherd 1988).By 1820, oil from this well was being shipped to Europe as well as several other southern states. Thus the Beatty Well seems to be the first drilled well which produced commercial oil in North America.

1846 - Baku the first ever well drilled with percussion tools to a depth of 21 metres for oil exploration

1849 - Abraham Gesner developed a method for distilling kerosene from crude oil

1859 - Col. Edwin Drake struck oil 69ft below the surface of the ground in Titusville, Pennsylvania.

1870 - J.D.Rockerfeller formed Standard Oil (Ohio).- controlled 10% of American oil refining

1885 - Oil discovered in Sumatra by Royal Dutch

1910 - Lakeview gusher blew out near Los Angeles, CA, reportedly at rates of >100,000BOPD with a total of 9,000,000 Bbls oil released before the well was brought under control

1938 - Oil discoverd in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia

1960 - OPEC (Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) founded in Baghdad - Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Kuwait, Iraq, and Iran

1969 - Oil discovered in North Sea

1971 - US oil production peaked

1986 - Oil prices collapse

1989 - March - Exxon Valdez aground in Prince William Sound, Alaska

1998 - 50 year moratorium on mining and oil exploration in Antarctica approved

2002 - (November) - Oil tanker Prestige sunk off NW coast of Spain

2004 (Oct 25) - Oil at a record price of $55.67 US per barrel on concerns over high demand and possible supply disruptions in the Middle East and damage on the Gulf Coast from Hurricane Ivan .

2007 (Nov 20) - WTI oil price futures hit a record close of $99.29US driven by supply concerns and weakness in the US dollar

2008 (July 23) - Alaska gives nod to TransCanada Pipeline to develop the Alaska Gas Pipeline.

2009 (Jan 19) - Oil price falls to $34 US per barrel

2010 (Apr 20) - Deepwater Horizon rig explosion and fire while drilling BP’s Macondo exploration well, in Gulf of Mexico, 11 workers killed and concern about a major environmental catastrophe along the Gulf Coast

2010 (Oct 12) - USA lifts ban on deep water drilling in the Gulf of Mexico

2011 (Dec 31) - US natural gas production in December 2011 at a record high level of 66.2Bcf/d breaking a previous high dating back from 1973

012 (Apr 1) - Total well leaking gas at Elgin Field 240Km east of Scotland in North Sea

2012 (Aug 25) - A blast at the Amuay oil refinery in Venezuela kills nearly 50 people

Introducing the star of the show: Oil

Over the last few weeks I have done focus sections about fracking and nuclear power, I am now going to focus on petroleum. To get us started a few facts about the state of play in 2012.

The World of Petroleum in 2012 - Summarised from the US International Energy Statistics Website

Production

• Total world production was 89,000 barrels per day
• The biggest oil producting region is the Middle East: supplying 27,000 barrels a day.
• The two biggest oil producing countries are the USA and Saudi Arabia (both producing around 11,000 barrels a day.
• For comparison, the UK produced about 1000 barrels per day in 2012, 90% of this is from offshore deposits

Consumption

• The Asia and Oceania region consumes the most oil: 28,000 barrels a day. 
• USA is the biggest single consumer of oil: 18,000 barrels a day. This is more than South America and Africa combined.
• Oil consumption between 2007-2012 has plateaued or decreased in North America, South American, Europe, Eurasia and Africa.
• Oil consumption in the Middle East and Asia and Oceania has significantly (by more than 20%) increased in the last five years between 2007-2012. 

Imports vs. Exports

• Asia and Oceania are by far the biggest importers of oil (more than three times any other region) 
• Asia and Oceania have had the biggest growth in amount of imports in the last five years 
• Asia and Oceania are the biggest exporters of oil in 2012. Starting to see a pattern here...

Well you'll be pleased to hear I am done bombarding you with facts! There probably isn't anything too surprising here, it is just helpful to put some numbers on things so that when reports talk about 'thousands of barrels a day' etc we have an understanding of what this compares to. Over the next week or two I will look into the global petroleum market and its a future. 

A quick Google of 'oil' is likely to spring up some images from the Popeye cartoon of his one true love: Olive Oil. I am definitely going to need a spinach fix to help with the research on this topic! Fond memories...

Courtesy of popeye.com

Technology Idea of the Week

Technological developments help determine the future of energy sources so I have decided to introduce a new feature in my blog: Technological Idea of the Week! Some of the ideas maybe in the start up stage, some of them maybe more in the creative stage! This will help to examine some of the new players in the energy market alongside the giants such as oil and nuclear power.

The Solar Chimney 

For my first edition in this series I am going to look at a project that takes a new approach to solar and wind power. What is particularly unique about this project is the way it combines different renewable technologies to help improve reliability and maximise power production. 

Image Courtesy of Solar Innovations

The Solar Chimney has two key components: a array of solar cells and a chimney with a turbine at the top. Air is heated at the base by the solar cells and therefore decreases in density and rises up through the chimney. This creates an updraught of air which will propel the turbines at the top of the chimney generating electricity. This can be seen in the diagram below which also demonstrates how this could be attached to houses and utilise pre-existing chimneys.

Image Courtesy of Solar Innovations

This idea has been around since the beginning of the 20th century and an experimental one was constructed in 1982 but then taken down due to concerns over collapse (BBC News, 20th November 2013). However, this idea has suddenly been given life again due the backing of Per Lindstrand who aims to build a 1km (yes 1km) high tower! He is famous for being the first person to cross the Atlantic in a balloon and has funding for this project from the 1851 Royal Commission (The Engineer, 19th November 2013).

Over the last thirty years there has been a lot of research into modelling solar chimneys to try and estimate how effective they can be. The chimney height and turbine head design have the biggest impacts on the efficiency of the solar chimney (Hamdam, Renewable Energy, 2011). Comparison of existing solar chimneys in Spain and Australia have allowed testing of the models to access their validity but there is much more research needed to make sure we use the best design to maximise efficiency (Nizetic et al, Energy Journal, 2008).

Nuclear Power - Final Thoughts

To conclude my section on Nuclear Power I wanted to do a brief summary of the threats and opportunities it presents. More detail and references to relevant information on each aspect can be found in previous posts, this is just a quick conclusion!

Opportunities

• Reliable and continuous form of energy
• Ongoing research to improve the safety and efficiency of the process
• Offers energy security and independence for many countries
• Low carbon technology compared  to fossil fuels
• Public perception

Threats

• Very expensive technology and decommissioning costs
• Safe disposal of radioactive waste
• Risk of fallout after accidents or natural hazards
• Taking focus from renewable energy
• Public perception

I have deliberately put public perception in both opportunities and threats. A wealth of research suggests that a lot of the general public are very opposed to nuclear power, largely for concerns over safety. After disasters such as Fukushima and Chernobyl this isn't overly surprising (Macilwain, Nature, 2011). However, the ultimate challenge nuclear power has to overcome is the cost. A study by MIT in 2003 and again in 2009 showed that the cost of building a nuclear power plant had doubled in just five years from $2000/kW to $4000/kW (Du and Parsons, CEEPR, 2009). These units represent the price per kilowatt hour to build a new rector. The price of oil and gas power plants has also increased though not as rapidly. 

The increasing cost of nuclear reactors is set to increase due to material costs, safety improvements and uranium costs. Ultimately this increasing cost will eventually make nuclear power unprofitable as a energy source over the next 50-100 years (European Parliament Conference). 

My final thought, living in a country that never experiences devastating earthquakes it is difficult to imagine the reaction to the Fukushima Nuclear Power plant disaster. This week the UCL Institute for Risk and Disaster Reduction commemorated its work with Japan by hosting a symposium on the disaster with representatives from UCL and Tohoku University. Attending the symposium helped me understand this a little more and I wanted to finish with a map of the world showing nuclear power plants and seismic activity. The devastation after Fukushima really makes you question if nuclear power is worth it.

Worldwide nuclear power plants and earthquake zones - courtesy of MAPTD 2013

Blue dots - The location of 248 atomic energy plants, including numbers of reactors
Heatmap - Every earthquake after 1973 with a magnitude over 4.5. Around 173,000 in total

A Good Day to Die Hard

You can't go wrong with a classic action plot line, although I have to say that Die Hard Five (hilariously named "A Good Day to Die Hard") pushes the limits slightly.

The final seen sees Bruce Willis and his son (who conveniently is undercover for the CIA) destroy a house containing a large amount of uranium weapons: the same technology used in commercial nuclear reactors. What caught my eye in this scene was the iPad app that Brucey was using which told him the radiation levels in the house: informing him they were in a perilous situation. I wanted to see if there was much science behind this or whether Hollywood was just having a laugh. 

During the Japan Earthquake and Tsuanami in 2011, radio and TV were recorded as being the most useful media for distributing information. However mobile devices which can connect to wifi are becoming increasingly significant, alongside this is a the development of apps for emergency situations. 

Earthquake Warning App - using data from the Japan Meteorological Agency, users get an early warning about an earthquake. This only gives a few minutes warning but allows people to go into emergency procedures such as turning off gas supplies and getting to a safer location. 

Defibrillator App - this app shows the users proximity to automated defibrillators which can be used by anyone to restart someone's heart. This is one example of many useful apps which relate to emergency services and healthcare in the area. 

Safe Area Checker - this app was created after the disaster at the Fukushima power plant so that users can check their proximity to the area which is deemed unsafe to enter. This app has been incredibly popular. 

I couldn't find any 'die hard' style radiation apps yet but there are certainly some really helpful products being created. The ones focused on getting information or support to people during or after the event seem great, providing they are kept up to date. I'm a little more sceptical about ones that aim to 'predict' events or show augmented realities of what different hazards would do. To me this seems unnecessary scaremongering and I'm not sure what 'evidence' some of the apps are based on. 

Information sourced from Emergency Journalism website 

Nuclear Power - The Debate

A few weeks ago I posted a TED video about the energy debate which touched on a number of the different issues. Here is a summary of the debate with evidence from other publications as well.

In Proposition of Nuclear Power: 

1. New technologies - to improve safety of the plant and waste removal. For example the AP1000, developed by Westinghouse Electric Company, reactor does not require any human input to be activated and it prevents the release of radioactive waste (Ferguson, 2011, Nature) 
2. Reliability - nuclear power is a consistent and reliable source of energy. Despite several very serious examples of safety issues, it can be argued that nuclear power is safe providing it is well regulated. Corner et al (2011, Energy Policy ) argue that the UK public is 'reluctantly accepting' nuclear technology because of the reliability and energy security it offers. 
3. Low carbon - nuclear power does not produce carbon dioxide as a bi-product therefore it is seen as low carbon compared to fossil fuels. Much political debate has now re-framed nuclear power as part of the solution for low carbon energy options (Bickerstaff et al, 2008, PUS). 
4. Energy security - nuclear offers energy independence to many countries and is relativity unaffected by embargoes, which affect other non-renewables. 

In Opposition to Nuclear Power: 

1. Safety - the Fukushima disaster left a 30km2 area around the power plant "severely affected" (population evacuated) by radioactive waste. In addition the long term impacts on health, mental well-being and the economy are hugely implicated (Brumfiel, 2013, Nature)  
2. Expense - construction of a large nuclear reactor (>1000 megawatts) varies between £3-6 billion. (Ferguson, 2011, Nature). Since the 2009 Fukushima disaster, the cost of nuclear power plants has escalated due to increased safety precautions and governments often have to subsidise construction.
3. Nuclear waste - one of the arguments in favour of establishing the Anthropocene as a new geological epoch includes information about changes in chemical traces in the earth (Zalasiewicz, 2011 Royal Society). There are strict regulations about disposal of radioactive waste however there are still many concerns that storage is not sufficient for isotopes with long decay rates. 
4. Takes focus from renewables - a slightly less quantifiable yet still important issue is how much does this detract from researching new technologies? If governments and companies have to subsidise nuclear power so heavily, wouldn't this be better invested in more sustainable solutions. 

In conclusion...

The term 'reluctant acceptance' used by Corner et al, 2011 seems to fit a lot of peoples view of nuclear power and I think it sums up mine as well. It seems a bit ridiculous that we have to take the safety risks inherent in nuclear technology yet the reliability and security of energy supply it offers are unparalleled. 

My prediction is that nuclear power will cease to play a significant part in energy supply over the next 50 years. Why? Simple: it is going to get too expensive. Better technology, improved safety and depleting uranium supply will eventually make this a completely unviable business model.