Guest Speaker: Athena Coustenis
Based at the Observatoire de Paris, Dr Athena Coustenis is the world's pre-eminent expert on Titan, the Saturn moon that has fascinated astronomers and astrophysicists since its discovery in 1655.
Born in Athens, Greece, Dr Coustenis moved to France to study, receiving her PhD Astrophysics and Space Techn... Profile
Discussion - June 2008
Some ideas for producing energy seem completely unrealistic today, but are there, in fact, new technologies waiting to be developed that we are yet to explore?
15 Comments from our contributors
Loading ...
Twitter
RSS
LinkedIn
Youtube
Flickr
Twitter
LinkedIn
Youtube
Flickr
RSS
Member
Surrey Satellite Technology Ltd
said: On 01/06/2008
Clearly most satellites already use solar power, and there are suggestions that space-based systems could be used to provide solar energy to the Earth for terrestrial applications. Proposals include using large space-based mirrors to reflect sunlight down to cities at night, as an alternative to street lighting, and very large solar voltaic arrays or concentrator dishes which could be used to collect solar energy in orbit, and then beam it down to suitable collectors on the Earth, using high-power microwaves or lasers.
Currently, the launch costs of the satellites needed to carry these very large collecting systems makes the through-life cost of such proposals unattractive in comparison to terrestrial alternatives. However, this situation could change if more economic access to space becomes possible.
CEO
World Land Trust
said: On 01/06/2008
It is, to me, self evident that based on the experience of the past, that new technologies will be developed, and that existing technologies will become much more efficient. But this actually avoids the really important issue, and that is that we should not only be reducing the need for energy, but we should also be reducing the world’s human population. If the world’s human population used energy at the rate used by most developed societies, then the impact on all other resources would overwhelm them. The real issue is not actually energy at all: it is a human population, spiraling out of control. It is unsustainable at present levels, and any increase will only exacerbate the problems further, particularly growth in the developed nations of the world.
Head of Public Relations
Q-Cells
said: On 01/06/2008
There definitely will be new technologies that we have not heard of yet. Directly producing electricity from sunlight on a large scale seemed not to be feasible in the past, and now it is spreading all over the world. But one thing is for certain: the source of energy will be the same. It is the sun that sends much more energy onto this planet than we will ever need. What needs to be done is to use this energy source for the good of mankind. That will satisfy the world’s hunger for energy without ruining our future. The solar energy technology we use is in its infancy, it is what Ford’s “Tin Lizzy” was for the automobile industry: the first standard mass produced good of its kind. Look how cars have changed and still do. So will solar technology. Only the principle will remain: to turn the sun’s energy directly into sunlight.
Lecturer
Cranfield University
said: On 01/06/2008
A space-based solution for sustainable energy production?
Interest in technologies for fossil-fuel-free energy production has been present even before global warming became a public talking point; oil and gas are finite resources and viable alternatives must be found. Methods including wind, wave, water, geothermal and solar power have all become established for terrestrial power generation; albeit only fairly recently and on comparatively small scales. In the space sector, however, the latter of these methods, solar energy, has been used as the main power source since the first satellites launched half a century ago. Increasing sophistication in the solar cell technologies used, and advances in the scale of the satellites themselves, mean that today’s communications satellites may carry solar panels capable of generating tens of kilowatts.
How, though, is this relevant for terrestrial power generation?
A recent study undertaken by Alexander Bradley, an MSc student at Cranfield University(i), investigated the idea of Space Solar Power Stations (SSPS); an idea which is attracting significant attention and debate in the space community. These systems would act as orbiting solar collectors, beaming back solar energy to Earth-based receiving stations in microwave form. The orbiting collectors overcome the traditional constraints associated with solar power: the day-night cycle and the weather. The study built on a number of previous investigations undertaken by agencies such as NASA and Japan’s JAXA; key findings are presented here. The general idea of the SSPS is shown below:
The SSPS can theoretically be scaled up to the point where it supplies a significant proportion of the global energy requirement. “Emission-free”(ii) energy production at a level of 10 TW (Terawatts, = 1012 watts) is considered to be consistent with the aims of stabilising the Earth’s climate. A system of this scale would require 330 power generation and 24 distribution satellites in Earth orbit, with an estimated system mass of 19 million tonnes and cost of $10 trillion, based on producing the required energy over the period 2030 to 2060. This is clearly a monumental figure, and may initially appear unrealistic.
However, to put this cost into context, analysis by Stern in 2007(iii) estimates that a “business as usual” scenario over the next 2 centuries would incur climate-change-related costs of 20% of the Gross Global Product (GGP) per year. A rough prediction of this figure in real terms is a global cost of climate change by 2050 of around $850 trillion. This provides a thought-provoking comparison in itself, when considering the costs of the SSPS system, and we can further consider both the costs saved in terms of the terrestrial power generation infrastructure which would no longer be required, and the revenues generated from the sale of the electricity generated.
Spreading the cost over 10 years, we get a figure per year of around 1-1.5% of the GGP, at which point the enormous scale and cost of the undertaking starts to seem a reasonable solution to future energy needs. Most of the technical requirements for such a system do not appear insurmountable. Launch rates would have to increase dramatically, but this would itself give the benefit of reducing the cost-per-kilo into orbit. Issues of human safety for the low-intensity microwave beams would have to be addressed, as would the effect the beams would have on the ionosphere. A climate stabilisation and SSPS development roadmap is proposed in the study, and includes these areas.
Clearly, if such a venture were to go ahead, it would require intergovernmental and even pan-global cooperation. But this cooperation could perhaps prove beneficial in itself, and we might imagine a vision of a more equitable distribution of energy around the globe, with the resultant improvement in quality of life contributing to world peace. It would certainly be a laudable application of the ideas and technologies that were born during the militaristic space race of previous decades.
(i)Bradley, A., “Stabilising Global Climate with Space Solar Power”, MSc Thesis, Cranfield University, 2007..
(ii)It should be noted that the SSPS solution is not truly emission-free: CO2 emissions would be incurred in the production of the solar panels and other components, and the rocket launches required to place the equipment into orbit. However, expectations are that the emissions would be around 20g CO2 per kWh (compared to 22g for nuclear energy and 1225g for coal).
(iii)Stern, N., “The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review.” Cambridge University Press, 2007
Vice President
Iogen
said: On 03/06/2008
From a European point of view, the obvious technologies that are considered “good ideas” by policy makers but that are yet to be developed are Advanced Biofuels such as cellulose ethanol.
Why this type of technology?
Europe is one of the leaders in the battle against climate change. At the European or Member State level we have had many greenhouse gas reduction targets, objectives and instruments. We have done well: all the sectors covered by the UN Convention on Climate Change have decreased their emissions by about 13% between 1990 and 2007……except Transport whose emissions have increased by 25% over the same period. There are talks to include the Aviation sector in the European Emissions Trading Scheme, but road transport represents more than 80% of all transport emissions.
Furthermore, Transport is the last large sector in Europe that has no carbon constraint. It is therefore vital that we tackle road transport emissions.
On the one hand, car manufacturers have achieved great reductions over the years but it is more and more difficult – and costly – to achieve additional reductions through vehicle technology improvements. On the other hand, advanced biofuels that use agricultural residue such as straw – thus not competing with food – can deliver substantial CO2 reduction from road transport, and they can be used in today’s cars.
How can we commercialise these technologies?
For a great many years, billions have been invested in biofuel research |ANAMP| development by many companies and technologies are now at the stage where they can be commercialised. However, in order to be able to raise capital to build new plants, investor confidence needs to be established. To do this, we need long term and clear signals from European governments such as technology incentives and set targets. This will facilitate investment in these pioneering technologies. This is why I believe that to a large extent the biofuels market is a political market.
Some of these signals already exist, such as Germany’s full tax exemption for advanced biofuels until 2015 or the European Commission’s proposed 10% biofuels target by 2020.
Others are being developed such as a set of sustainability criteria for biofuels. European institutions are developing these criteria, so are policy makers in other parts of the world such as the US and Asian countries. For a global biofuel market to be truly sustainable the industry will need a harmonized set of such criteria.
Finally, another policy wish that has yet to be discussed but that is key to the fight against transport emissions is for biofuel targets to be expressed not in volumes but in terms of CO2 savings.
It’s only when the above policy instruments will be adopted that the biofuel industry will be able to turn straw into gold on a large scale
founder and Managing Director
Alternative Energy Finance Ltd
said: On 03/06/2008
Perhaps only the Saudi’s among OPEC members had the sense to try to keep a lid on crude oil prices so as to discourage competition, but the inexorable rise in demand from industrializing China and India have stoked demand for energy that has outstripped even Saudi oil production for some time to come.
Instead the persistence of high oil prices has fostered innovation and opened the purse-strings of venture capitalists to other ways of meeting energy demand. Within the petroleum industry we see the expansion of tar sands projects and serious reviews of oil shale which may now become economically viable. While coal-bed and coal-mine methane extraction has become more common in the last 5-10 years, Soviet technology for the underground combustion of coal seams to make syngas for either power generation or synthetic diesel fuel is starting to find its way to the West.
Wind turbines have grown immensely popular and ever larger over the last decade from a few kilowatts to several megawatts, so these can hardly be characterized as unrealistic, though vertical axis turbines may prove more efficient for smaller deployments. Solar cells from silicon wafer and thin film have proved viable for specialist applications, but have yet to break the cost barrier wherein they can be deployed in large scale without subsidy. Meanwhile several purveyors of solar-heat to power technologies have announced large solar parks for ever lower capital costs. Harnessing tidal flows seems a logical prime mover for power generation, but is only now being implemented at pilot stage owing to its high capital costs and the need to protect turbines from storm damage. A challenge with all power generation technology remains developing economical mass scale battery, heat or chemical storage systems to smooth out the peaks between customer demand and renewable supply.
The hydrogen economy is some ways away from displacing liquid transportation fuels given the cost of storing and delivering it. However, biofuels have proven themselves to be immensely popular since they require little or no modification of the modern vehicle fleet. Nevertheless turning food crops (e.g., sugar cane, maize, palm oil, rapeseed oil, etc) into biofuels is only an interim step because the supply feedstock is both limited and in competition for basic nutritional needs. The innovations to watch for here are in cultivating unconventional crops such as oil seeds (e.g., jatropha, salicornia) and biomass (e.g., switchgrass, miscanthus, hemp) in marginal lands, capturing waste streams (sewage sludge and municipal solid waste) or eventually commercializing algae production.
There are two general technologies for the creation of next generation biofuels: one is biological, i.e., using special enzymes and bacteria to convert biomass into fuel; the other is thermal-chemical in which biomass is flash-heated into bio-oil and syngas which then gets condensed and refined into liquid fuels with Fischer-Tropsch or similar processes. Electromagnetic conversion is being explored as a more efficient means of affecting chemical change than the traditional heat-pressure that is characteristic of most refining processes. New catalysts and nano-particles will also accelerate chemical processes and make economic what is now purely theoretical.
In short, the energy industry is muddling through a period of profound change, sifting through the technologies that will allow the gradual replacement of petroleum by renewable energy sources. The next five to ten years will likely witness a variety of technologies competing for market share. The race has only just begun.
Founder, President and CEO
Solar Ventures
said: On 09/06/2008
Some scientists predict that by 2050 (at the end of the day only 42 years from now), solar energy in all of its forms will contribute for over 50% to total energy needs. Particularly utilities say instead that solar energy will make up for a few percentage points of the mix.
I personally believe in the first statement (50% of the mix) and it is a matter of cheaper traditional technologies, extension of applications and geographic coverage and, inevitably, some new breakthrough technology that we cannot even fully foresee today. Just think computers in 1966 vs. today….
Member
European Parliament
said: On 09/06/2008
Absolutely. Scotland is particularly fortunate to be blessed with enormous potential in the development of both renewable and non-renewable forms of energy. Our inherent capabilities with which we can make our mark on the technological evolution of this sector are immense and I am proud to see that there are so many ground-breaking projects in the pipeline at present. Some may seem quite far-fetched right now but with technological breakthroughs happening at an almost daily rate, schemes like these may well become feasible within a relatively short space of time.
Just last week I was out in West Lothian at a laboratory which has developed a hybrid car which produces 50% less carbon emissions and uses 50% less fuel. When the initial proposals were drawn up several decades ago, it was not possible to develop the car as the alloys in existence at that point in time were not strong enough. As alloys have become stronger and hydraulics have become more sophisticated, theories like this one that had previously been impossible to develop are becoming ever more feasible.
We are still learning when it comes to renewable energy production and undoubtedly we will end up learning as much from our failures as from our successes. But while we allow imagination to flourish; while we continue to explore new approaches; and while we give our inventors and engineers the support they require then we will continue to see the development of previously unimagined or technologically impossible concepts.
Environmental and Spatial Planning Engineer
Intelligent Energy Europe
said: On 16/06/2008
Indeed, the number of researchers and inventors trying to come up with new ways of generating energy must go into the thousands given today’s energy challenges: climate change, Europe’s dependence on foreign energy, high and volatile energy prices, and supply interruptions. But there is also a sense of opportunity and hope to be at the forefront of innovation, to gain competitive advantage, and to create new jobs.
So there are clearly many good reasons to dream about, and work on, new energy generation technologies, even those which may look unrealistic under today’s conditions.
Yet, to put all hopes on new technologies and on the belief that human ingenuity will eventually come up with a magic solution is not an option.
First, this outcome simply may not happen.
Second, it may happen, but too late. Getting from a groundbreaking innovation to mature products and applications usually takes one to two generations. But who gives us this time? Greenhouse gas emissions must come down now, and energy demand may outstrip supply faster than expected.
Third, let’s therefore not forget to explore today’s solutions first. Modern renewable energy technologies are sophisticated and have great potential. Yet, they could be used much more. EU leaders want to achieve a 20% share of renewables by 2020, and some experts argue that we could even much further.
Fourth, technology alone is not enough. Frameworks do matter and we must work hard to get them right, be it for today’s or for tomorrow’s energy technologies. Laws, official procedures, market rules, tax policies, regional cultures and mindsets – they all decide about technology success or failure. A specific EU funding programme – Intelligent Energy Europe – is in place to remove many of the barriers and restrictions that prevent the wider uptake of today’s proven energy efficiency and renewables technologies.
Last but not least, before even talking of energy generation let’s see first how much we can reduce our consumption. Given today’s oil price, reaching the official EU target of a 20% energy efficiency improvement by 2020 should be perfectly possible. Using energy more smartly is just as exciting as dreaming about new energy sources – but all too often it is completely forgotten.
Policy Officer
EUREC Agency
said: On 17/06/2008
There is no shortage of interesting new ideas for generating or using electricity or heat cleanly. Examples abound in all fields of renewable energy, whether marine, wind, solar energy, or any other category, and in grid technology and load management.
Facing as urgent a threat as climate change, and exposed to high oil and gas prices, it would be irresponsible for technology policy to focus mainly on technologies that today seem completely unrealistic.
The correct approach is for the bulk of research money to go towards work that, with a high degree of probability, will achieve cost reductions in climate-friendly technologies. Manufacturers of renewable energy technology will in large part pay for this kind of research if the market for their products is regulated in a way that creates strong demand and provides a strong incentive to improve their technology’s performance.
The role of the public sector is to fund research that the private sector considers to hold too little immediate commercial value, but which has good prospects for the longer term.
With greater public and private investment in research, a greater number of new approaches can be explored in the lab and, if successful, smoothly transferred to industrial production.
Member
Greenpeace Spain
said: On 17/06/2008
In order to overcome the climate crisis caused by fossil fuels and the radioactive threat of nuclear power the world does not need to find new energy sources or new technologies. What is urgently needed is to shift from dirty energy sources towards clean renewable energies as well as a change in the way we produce and use energy to do it with much more efficiency. But existing technologies for renewable power and for efficient energy use are already there and it’s a matter of political will to put them to a greater scale use.
Greenpeace’s Energy [R]evolution Scenario shows a practical blueprint for how to cut global energy related CO2 emissions by 50% by 2050 to avoid dangerous climate change, while maintaining global economic growth. The financial rationale for such scenario is provided by the report “Future Investment – A sustainable Investment Plan for the power sector to save the Climate”. This report demonstrates a powerful economic argument for a shift in global investments towards renewable energy (including solar, wind, hydro, geothermal and bio energy), up to 2030, and away from dangerous coal and nuclear power. Investing in a renewable electricity future will save 10 times the fuel costs of a business as usual fossil-fuelled scenario, saving $180 billion USD annually and cutting CO2 emissions in half by 2030.
Looking closer at a country level, Greenpeace also commissioned and published a technical study whose aim was to determine whether renewables are sufficient to meet society’s energy demand. The first part of this project, “Renewables 2050. A report on the potential of renewable energies in mainland Spain”, concluded that electricity generation capacity from renewable sources was equivalent to more than 56 times the electricity demand of mainland Spain projected for 2050, and more than 10 times total final energy demand. It was thus demonstrated that by using renewables it is possible to have energy in more than sufficient quantities.
In the second part of the report, “100% RENEWABLES. A renewable electricity system for mainland Spain and its economic feasibility”, the feasibility of a scenario based on renewable energies for electricity generation on the mainland are quantified and assessed from a technical standpoint. The analyses show technical and economic feasibility of a system based 100% on renewables. The key for this to become real is just to create the regulatory and economic framework to let existing renewable technologies to develop completely through their learning curve.
Policy Adviser
Bellona Europa
said: On 23/06/2008
CO2 capture and storage (CCS) is a key technology particularly because it will enable the power sector to become ‘carbon negative’ by 2050 when combined with biomass production.
At The Bellona Foundation, we try to identify solutions that will take us down the right track towards a truly sustainable economy. We cannot limit ourselves to what today are cost-efficient, incremental improvements. Because we are concerned that we will not manage to make sufficiently drastic emission cuts in the near term, we need to find out how we will be able to suck CO2 back from the atmosphere in the slightly longer term:
Biomass is carbon neutral as the CO2 emitted during its combustion is balanced by the uptake of CO2 in the photosynthesis process during biomass growth. By combining large-scale biomass power plants with CCS, the physical storage of CO2 will ensure that CO2 is actually removed from the atmosphere. A carbon negative plant relies on the following:
Algae may be particularly suitable to make carbon negative power. They grow fast, absorb huge amounts of CO2, many varieties thrive in salt water, and they produce oil directly, without any need for complicated processing. Algae production may therefore, independently of CCS, become an attractive decentralised energy source in many developing countries.
There should be a market for both small and large-scale carbon negative plants. Small plants delivering power and biofuel in the range 10-50 MW can be established to supply small societies with energy. Located in low value areas, the energy produced can contribute to sustainable industrial development, establishment of new industry and the creation of new jobs.
The technical potential for CO2 emission reduction through the carbon negative concept is promising. A recent report of The Bellona Foundation (http://www.bellona.org/reports/How_to_Combat_Global_Warming) estimates that global power generation may, on a net basis, become ‘carbon negative’ and suck out about 4 gigatonnes of CO2 per year from the atmosphere by 2050.
Web Marketing Director
UK Energy Saving
said: On 23/06/2008
The threat of global warming is a very real one which governments, businesses and individuals need to start addressing today. A key issue in the fight against climate change is the burning of fossil fuels with the high levels of greenhouse gases this produces, which is where renewable sources of energy come into play. Whilst there may well be new technologies available to us in the future, the reality is that we already have a wealth of energy at our disposal if only we make the right choices.
Some countries are leading the way in utilising renewable energy but most have barely scratched the surface of the potential available. To cite the UK as an example, wave, tidal and wind powers in particular have the potential to more than meet the country’s electricity requirements, but currently only about 5% of the UK’s electricity comes from renewable sources. With technology in many areas such as wind and solar power at an advanced level, now is the time to be taking great leaps forward with the utilisation of renewable energy sources across the globe. Research into new technological opportunities cannot be allowed to hold back the progress needed in this area in order to protect the planet from further and ongoing damage.
We should also remember, however, that producing clean, renewable energy is only part of the battle against climate change. The importance of energy efficiency also needs to be focussed on from governments down in order to bring about changes in the way, certainly in the developed world, that we squander energy. This will not only help to reduce carbon emissions in the short term, but will also help to close the gap between current fossil fuel energy production and the expansion of the use of renewable forms of energy.
Founder and Director
Mobility +
said: On 30/06/2008
The current barrel’s price crisis seems irreversible, the litre of unleaded petrol 95 approaches or overpasses 1.50€ without any perspective of reduction. Rich countries have enjoyed years of opulence with the discovery and exploitation of new energy which is now declining. Our societies and our companies have to react and adapt to this new era that will come. This will create a major opportunity to revive innovation in order to remain more sustainable and maintainable.
In the past few years, various constructors have announced new products and new sources of propulsion. Despite this, very few concrete solutions have been proposed. One of the proposed ideas was to make efforts for the mass production of new energies but this still purposes irreversible consequences on the environment and populations. For example, introduced as a miracle solution, bio fuels appear as one of the possible solutions, but they are finally very controversial in regards to the indirect damages that they could bring. However, research keeps on progressing with studies concerning second generation bio fuels. For example the use of wood waste shows new solutions that can be found from a material whose production does not compete with limited water needs and food growth.
Since seven years, we have been working in this field directly with companies, communities and small territories, and we could observe fundamental changes. Employers, major figures of everyday life moving and yesterday’s fervent defender of ”all-car”, bring back the right to alternative ways and practices of moving, with the strong will to find durable solutions.
Beyond this control, evaluation and optimisation of alternative solutions such as collective transport models heavy ways, (bus, transport on demand, carpool and auto share, or soft ways (bicycle, walking…), we are developing with our interlocutors some organisational solutions to integrate in their “mobility management”: research of “no moving” with the generalization of solutions like visio-conference, telework; optimisation of moving needs with integration of the new mobility “reflex” in the employers’ culture and behaviours (reassignment of parking space, reorganisation of work and meeting time, and optimisation of business trips).
Every captivity situation can not be solved by these answers, and new energy innovation is obviously still indispensable; however we must keep in mind the major impacts that could be generated by the progress of our standards and fixed ideas regarding the organisation of our modern societies that are facing this transport issue.
Director
The Prince of Wales's EU Corporate Leaders Group on Climate Change and Brussels Office, University of Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership
said: On 30/06/2008
I am not sure there are that many completely new energy technologies waiting out there. I think in the area of energy most of the potential future sources and technologies are known, have been researched or are being researched. Whether it is energy from solar, wind, nuclear fission, fusion, or fuels from Fischer Tropsch, advanced biofuel technologies using algae or switch grass, or heavier fuel oils such as tar sands, the real challenge is to bring these new and not so new technologies and energy sources to the market in a cost effective and environmentally friendly manner. If you take the example of tar sands as an energy source, we all know that heavier crude’s are more carbon intensive and are much more expensive to bring both out of the ground and produce into a usable energy source. Even if 150$ barrel crude increases economic viability, the high carbon footprint of such energy is not acceptable.
At the International Sustainable Energy Exchange (ISEE) we have faith in the human races capacity for innovation, and we must bank on this capacity when speaking about future energy use, energy diversification and producing more sustainable energy. To do this however, all stakeholders must take on the responsibility of working on solutions now and investing in the future. It is more a question of human will than technological innovation. I believe that with a package of innovative solutions on the energy technology and feedstock side coupled with sound energy efficiency measures and better management practices across all sectors, we will be able to meet this challenge and achieve a balance between our growing energy demands and reducing our environmental footprint. But we must start now by investing in well targeted research and development programs and putting in place the right price signals and policy drivers to ensure success. Achieving the right balance between regulatory structures and innovation is of course a challenge. However, as we approach 150$ a barrel oil we need to seriously consider our options and put in place the right policy and investment frameworks locally, regionally and globally for stimulating technological innovation and investment in best of class management techniques.