Is shale gas a good thing?

[Beef Oven]

I wonder how many controversial things the BBC don't feel the need to remind us they are, every time they refer to them.

Quite.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Isn't it strange that Greenpeace and their ilk are keen to foist windmills over the beautiful UK countryside but then object to shale fracking on the grounds that it will spoil the beautiful UK countryside . . .

[MrGongGong]

Isn't it strange that Greenpeace and their ilk are keen to foist windmills over the beautiful UK countryside but then object to shale fracking on the grounds that it will spoil the beautiful UK countryside . . .

Hummmm

There's a bit of a difference would't you say ?
A windmill is here for a while , then goes away
unlike what might happen with fracking

[teamsaint]

can somebody please remind me why, as a medium term measure until the will to massively increase renewables is discovered in the political elites, Clean burn coal is a worse solution than fracking?

[Dave2002]

can somebody please remind me why, as a medium term measure until the will to massively increase renewables is discovered in the political elites, Clean burn coal is a worse solution than fracking?

Probably because electricity generation using gas turbines is significantly more efficient because of the higher temperatures used. Clean burn coal at present seems about as practical as fracking - neither really work in the UK yet, nor will they for quite some time. Personally I'm very doubtful about the so-called carbon sequestration of "clean burn" coal, but who can tell?

There are also issues about where do you get the fuels from. Coal would need to be transported in large quantities - as in Drax, and just possibly shale gas could be extracted close to generating plants.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Hummmm

There's a bit of a difference would't you say ?
A windmill is here for a while , then goes away
unlike what might happen with fracking

Not really. The windmill's there for 25 years (of which ~15 generating), then you hope someone will take it down . . . The well fracking takes 12-18 months, then the drilling rig is removed, and a small extraction control valve fitted to the well head, and the site is vacated.

Edit: and windmills have hub heights greater than 100 m, whereas I doubt the drill rigs are much above 25 m.

Dave2002 is absolutely right about gas plants (CCGTs). 60 % efficiency nowadays.

[Dave2002]

Not really. The windmill's there for 25 years (of which ~15 generating), then you hope someone will take it down . . . The well fracking takes 12-18 months, then the drilling rig is removed, and a small extraction control valve fitted to the well head, and the site is vacated.

Dave2002 is absolutely right about gas plants (CCGTs). 60 % efficiency nowadays.

I think claiming 60% may be premature, though certainly recent generators have got very close. Even if a few plants have got up to 60%, there will still be many which operate at lower efficiency. Here is a link to more information about this kind of generation - http://www.iea-etsap.org/web/E-TechD...-GS-AD-gct.pdf

Arguably if generating plants are placed in urban areas the efficiency measures can be raised to close to 70%, as the waste heat can be used for space heating which would otherwise require additional fuel. Some Danish plants have been claimed to work in this way with relatively high efficiency.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

Siemens have developed CCGTs with >60 % efficiency - they managed this a couple of years back. The wiki on CCGTs also suggests this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_cycle

I don't think we have any in the UK.

The trouble with waste heat and space heating is that space heating demand is both seasonal and diurnal. Denmark has a great deal of CHP and it's working very badly because they have very little heavy or process engineering to take the waste heat so they're having to cycle the CHP plants to provide space heat. There's a report on the Danish grid by Hugh Sharman but I can't lay my hands on the reference just now. There might be locations where you could make this work well in the UK though. It would help if you could build a large heat store within the town (c.f. Reykjavik coupled to geothermal).

[Flosshilde]

A windmill is here for a while , then goes away

Not exactly. It isn't just stuck in the ground like a child's toy on the beach & then taken out. There is a substantial network of roads (not just tracks) in each windfarm to allow construction & maintenance vehicles access to each windmill. The windmills are massive & need equally massive foundations. When they are de-commissioned the roads & foundations will most likely be left behind.

(not that I'm in favour of 'the controversial practice known as fracking'. I'm more in favour of reducing energy consumption, especially industrial & commercial consumption.)

[Richard Barrett]

Greenpeace and their ilk are keen to foist windmills over the beautiful UK countryside

I suppose that depends on whether you think windmills spoil the countryside or not. Here in Germany there are over 20,000, and in the state of Sachsen-Anhalt they provide almost half the electricity used (though less than 10% over the country as a whole). Leaving their function aside, I would say that far from spoiling the countryside they stand as a symbol of a belated willingness on humanity's part to live a little more harmoniously with its environment instead of plundering it to barrenness.

[MrGongGong]

I would say that far from spoiling the countryside they stand as a symbol of a belated willingness on humanity's part to live a little more harmoniously with its environment instead of plundering it to barrenness.

Indeed

It's a shame how the religionists have "foisted" their hideous churches and cathedrals all over the countryside spoiling the view
or ?

[ahinton]

I suppose that depends on whether you think windmills spoil the countryside or not. Here in Germany there are over 20,000, and in the state of Sachsen-Anhalt they provide almost half the electricity used (though less than 10% over the country as a whole). Leaving their function aside, I would say that far from spoiling the countryside they stand as a symbol of a belated willingness on humanity's part to live a little more harmoniously with its environment instead of plundering it to barrenness.

Whilst no fan of them myself, I can only agree with your conclusion as to what they stand for. I do happen to think that they're something of an eyesore in some places, though no more so than large electricity pylons, but that's just a personal view. Proper and serious investment in renewable energy in general stands every chance of becoming beneficial not only to the environment and the harmonious living within it that you mention but also ultimately to cut the energy bills of all of us including the poorest in society who are most in need of such reductions in personal outgoings.

[An_Inspector_Calls]

I suppose that depends on whether you think windmills spoil the countryside or not. Here in Germany there are over 20,000, and in the state of Sachsen-Anhalt they provide almost half the electricity used (though less than 10% over the country as a whole). Leaving their function aside, I would say that far from spoiling the countryside they stand as a symbol of a belated willingness on humanity's part to live a little more harmoniously with its environment instead of plundering it to barrenness.

Well they seem to be falling out of favour over there:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/wind-energy-encounters-problems-and-resistance-in-germany-a-910816.html

Can't understand why the Germans have accepted so much renewable energy (wind <20 capacity factor over there). It's causing serious problems on the German grid:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9559656/Germanys-wind-power-chaos-should-be-a-warning-to-the-UK.html

If they're so marvellous, why are they building so many coal plants (ten is it?), to burn LIGNITE for god's sake. Yeah, that'll be the Germans living harmoniously with their environment!


In the UK I think they spoil the countryside. They're hideous. They are intermittent, have low capacity factor, have a limited lifetime during which they age badly (Gordon Hughes reports the availability of the UK fleet down to 15 % capacity factor after 10 years, and 11 % after 15),
http://www.ref.org.uk/attachments/ar...s.19.12.12.pdf)
are extremely expensive to build, cause huge disruption to the environment in upland areas, especially where there is peat, are not despatchable, and make no contribution to the UK's need for spinning and standing reserve. Worst of all they do little to curb emissions, since part loading of fossil plant to cover their deficiencies reduces the efficiency of that plant. They thus stand as a symbol of the collapse of science and engineering knowledge within the UK.

If we want to live harmoniously with our environment, which I'm all in favour of, build gas plants which are efficient, have small visual impact on the landscape, and cut emissions. By adopting that strategy the USA has reduced it's carbon dioxide emissions:

http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/usa_co2_q1_june2012_eia.png&imgrefurl=http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/02/us-co2-emissions-may-drop-to-1990-levels-this-year/&h=579&w=887&sz=31&tbnid=3ukIzrxi7seFgM:&tbnh=76&tbnw=116&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dus%2Bcarbon%2Bemissions%26tbm%3Disch%26tbo%3Du&zoom=1&q=us+carbon+emissions&usg=__tnCV6dXLNXyUVsExs6sA-7Luscw=&docid=A6-tFSKpymhHeM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=td_rUY-gD8SA0AWh7IGIDg&ved=0CH4Q9QEwDQ&dur=300

What other western country has done that recently.

[Richard Barrett]

build gas plants which are efficient, have small visual impact on the landscape, and cut emissions

And when the gas runs out?

The US may be reducing its CO2 emissions but it still produces almost half as much again as the entire European Union.

[Dave2002]

And when the gas runs out?

The US may be reducing its CO2 emissions but it still produces almost half as much again as the entire European Union.

It's good that the US has been able to rather rapidly reduce its CO2 emissions, but given where it was starting from it is hardly surprising. It is appalling that one moderately large country feels it's entitled to claim so much of the world's resources, and to a considerable extent misuse them. It is not an example which we should be following.

We (and they) shouldn't be confusing a short to medium term solution, which is undoubtedly, given the situation - particularly in the USA, a good thing, with a long term one.

Where the Americans could do a lot of good is by developing the technology, and also applications and techniques so that the rest of the world doesn't have to make the same mistakes. The UK is not blameless either, as over the last couple of hundred years of industrialisation, the UK has been a world leader in total consumption - check it out - I think the figures are in David MacKay's book.