Search This Blog

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Energy development



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Energy development
Schematic of the global sources of energy in 2010
Total Renewables split-up by source
   Fossil
   Renewable
   Nuclear
   Geo-heat
   Hydro
   Ethanol
   Biodiesel
   Wind
   Solar PV
   Solar CSP
   Oceanic
Source: Renewable Energy Policy Network[1]
World total primary energy production
World total primary energy production
  Total world primary energy production (quadrillion Btu)[2]
   China
   Russia
   Africa
   Europe
   Central and South America
Note the different y-axis for total (left) and regional curves (right)
US Energy Use/Flow in 2011
alt= Estimated US Energy Use/Flow in 2011. Energy flow charts show the relative size of primary energy resources and end uses in the United States, with fuels compared on a common energy unit basis.
Energy flow charts show the relative size of primary energy resources and end uses in the United States, with fuels compared on a common energy unit basis (2011: 97.3 quads).[3]
Compounds and Radiant Energy
   Solar
   Nuclear
   Hydro
   Wind
   Geothermal
   Natural Gas
   Coal
   Biomass
   Petroleum
Producing Electrical Currents/Utilizing Effects Transmitted
   Electricity Generation
   Residential, Commercial, Industrial, transportation
   Rejected energy[note 1]
   Energy Services
Energy development[4][5][6] is a field of endeavor focused on making available sufficient primary energy sources[7] and secondary energy forms to meet the needs of society.[8][9][10][11][12] These endeavors encompass those which provide for the production of conventional, alternative and renewable sources of energy, and for the recovery and reuse of energy that would otherwise be wasted. Energy conservation[note 2] and efficiency measures[note 3] reduce the impact of energy development, and can have benefits to society with changes in economic cost and with changes in the environmental effects.

Contemporary industrial societies use primary and secondary energy sources for transportation and the production of many manufactured goods. Also, large industrial populations have various generation and delivery services for energy distribution and end-user utilization.[note 4] This energy is used by people who can afford the cost to live under various climatic conditions through the use of heating, ventilation, and/or air conditioning. Level of use of external energy sources differs across societies, along with the convenience, levels of traffic congestion, pollution sources[13] and availability of domestic energy sources.

Thousands of people in society are employed in the energy industry, of which subjectively influence and impact behaviors. The conventional industry comprises the petroleum industry[note 5] the gas industry,[note 6] the electrical power industry[note 7] the coal industry, and the nuclear power industry. New energy industries include the renewable energy industry, comprising alternative and sustainable manufacture, distribution, and sale of alternative fuels. While there is the development of new hydrocarbon sources,[14] including deepwater/horizontal drilling and fracking, are contentiously underway, commitments to mitigate climate change are driving efforts to develop sources of alternative and renewable energy.

Types of energy

Open System Model (basics)

Colloquially, and in non-scientific literature, the terms power,[note 8] fuels, and energy can be used as synonyms, but in the field of energy technology they possess different distinct meanings that are associated with them. An energy source is usually in the form of a closed system, the element that provides the energy by conversion from another energy form; However, the energy can be quantitative, the balance sheet is capable of containing open system energy transfers.[note 9]

Illustrative of this can be the emanations from the sun, which with its nuclear fusion is the most important energy source for the Earth[note 10] and which provides its energy in the form of radiation.
The natural elements[note 11] of the material world exist in forms that can be converted into usable energy and are resources from which society can obtain energy to produce heat, light, and motion (among the many uses). According to their nature, the power plants can be classified into:
Classified according to the energy reserves of the energy source used and the regeneration capacity with:
So, for example, shale gas is secondary non-renewable. Wind is a primary renewable.

The principle stated by Antoine Lavoisier on the conservation of matter applies to energy development:[note 17] "nothing is created." Thus any energy "production" is actually a recovery transformation of the forms of energy whose origin is that of the universe.

For example, a bicycle dynamo turns in part from the kinetic energy (speed energy) of the movement of the cyclist and converting it into electrical energy will transfer in particular to its lights producing light, that is to say light energy, via the heating of the filament of the bulb and therefore heat (thermal energy). But the kinetic energy of the rider is itself biochemical energy (the ATP muscle cells) derived from the chemical energy of sugars synthesized by plants who use light energy from the sun, which runs from the nuclear energy produced by fusion of atoms of hydrogen, the material itself constitute a form of energy, called "mass energy".

Fossil fuels


The Moss Landing Power Plant in California is a fossil-fuel power station that burns natural gas in a turbine to produce electricity.

Fossil fuel (primary non-renewable fossil) sources burn coal or hydrocarbon fuels, which are the remains of the decomposition of plants and animals. There are three main types of fossil fuels: coal, petroleum, and natural gas. Another fossil fuel, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), is principally derived from the production of natural gas. Heat from burning fossil fuel is used either directly for space heating and process heating, or converted to mechanical energy for vehicles, industrial processes, or electrical power generation.

Fossil energy is from recovered fossils (like brown coal, hard coal, peat, natural gas and crude oil) and are originated in degradated products of dead plants and animals. These fossil fuels are based on the carbon cycle and thus allow stored (historic solar) energy to be recycled today. In 2005, 81% were of the world's energy needs met from fossil sources.[15] Biomass is also derived from wood and other organic wastes and modern remains. The technical development of fossil fuels in the 18th and 19th Century set the stage for the Industrial Revolution.

Fossil fuels make up the bulk of the world's current primary energy sources. The technology and infrastructure already exist for the use of fossil fuels. Petroleum energy density in terms of volume (cubic space) and mass (weight) ranks currently above that of alternative energy sources (or energy storage devices, like a battery). Fossil fuels are currently economical, and suitable for decentralized energy use.

Dependence on fossil fuels from regions or countries creates energy security risks for dependent countries.[16][17][18][19][20] Oil dependence in particular has led to war,[21] funding of radicals,[22] monopolization,[23] and socio-political instability.[24] Fossil fuels are non-renewable, un-sustainable resources, which will eventually decline in production[25] and become exhausted, with consequences to societies that remain dependent on them. Fossil fuels are actually slowly forming continuously, but are being consumed quicker than are formed.[note 18] Extracting fuels becomes increasingly extreme as society consumes the most accessible fuel deposits. Extraction in fuel mines get intensive and oil rigs drill deeper (going further out to sea).[26] Extraction of fossil fuels results in environmental degradation, such as the strip mining and mountaintop removal of coal.

Fuel efficiency is a form of thermal efficiency, meaning the efficiency of a process that converts chemical potential energy contained in a carrier fuel into kinetic energy or work. The fuel economy is the energy efficiency of a particular vehicle, is given as a ratio of distance travelled per unit of fuel consumed. Weight-specific efficiency (efficiency per unit weight) may be stated for freight, and passenger-specific efficiency (vehicle efficiency per passenger). The inefficient atmospheric combustion (burning) of fossil fuels in vehicles, buildings, and power plants contributes to urban heat islands.[27]

Conventional production of oil has peaked, conservatively, between 2007 to 2010.[note 19] In 2010, it was estimated that an investment in non-renewable resources of $8 trillion would be required to maintain current levels of production for 25 years.[28] In 2010, governments subsidized fossil fuels by an estimated $500 billion a year.[29] Fossil fuels are also a source of greenhouse gas emissions, leading to concerns about global warming if consumption is not reduced.

The combustion of fossil fuels leads to the release of pollution into the atmosphere. The fossil fuels are mainly based on organic carbon compounds. They are according to the IPCC the causes of the global warming.[30] During the combustion with oxygen in the form of heat energy, carbon dioxide released. Depending on the composition and purity of the fossil fuel also results in other chemical compounds such as nitrogen oxides (NOx) and soot and other fine particulates alternativey. Greenhouse gas emissions result from fossil fuel-based electricity generation. A typical coal plant generates billions of kilowatt hours per year.[31][note 20] Emissions from such fossil fuel power station include carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, small particulates, nitrogen oxides, smog with high levels of ozone, carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons, volatile organic compounds (VOC), mercury, arsenic, lead, cadmium, other heavy metals, and traces of uranium.[32][33]

Nuclear

Fission

The Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, a boiling water reactor. The reactors are located inside the rectangular containment buildings towards the front of the cooling towers. The power station produces 63 million kilowatt hours per day.
American nuclear powered ships,(top to bottom) cruisers USS Bainbridge, the USS Long Beach and the USS Enterprise, the longest ever naval vessel, and the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. Picture taken in 1964 during a record setting voyage of 26,540 nmi (49,190 km) around the world in 65 days without refueling. Crew members are spelling out Einstein's mass-energy equivalence formula E = mc2 on the flight deck.
The Russian nuclear-powered icebreaker NS Yamal on a joint scientific expedition with the NSF in 1994

Nuclear power, or nuclear energy, is the use of exothermic nuclear processes,[34] to generate useful heat and electricity. The term includes nuclear fission, nuclear decay and nuclear fusion. Presently the nuclear fission of elements in the actinide series of the periodic table produce the vast majority of nuclear energy in the direct service of humankind, with nuclear decay processes, primarily in the form of geothermal energy, and radioisotope thermoelectric generators, in niche uses making up the rest. Nuclear (fission) power stations, excluding the contribution from naval nuclear fission reactors, provided about 5.7% of the world's energy and 13% of the world's electricity in 2012.[35] In 2013, the IAEA report that there are 437 operational nuclear power reactors,[36] in 31 countries,[37] although not every reactor is producing electricity.[38] In addition, there are approximately 140 naval vessels using nuclear propulsion in operation, powered by some 180 reactors.[39][40][41] As of 2013, attaining a net energy gain from sustained nuclear fusion reactions, excluding natural fusion power sources such as the Sun, remains an ongoing area of international physics and engineering research. More than 60 years after the first attempts, commercial fusion power production remains unlikely before 2050.[42]

There is an ongoing debate about nuclear power.[43][44][45] Proponents, such as the World Nuclear Association, the IAEA and Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy contend that nuclear power is a safe, sustainable energy source that reduces carbon emissions.[46] Opponents, such as Greenpeace International and NIRS, contend that nuclear power poses many threats to people and the environment.[47][48][49]

Nuclear power plant accidents include the Chernobyl disaster (1986), Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster (2011), and the Three Mile Island accident (1979).[50] There have also been some nuclear submarine accidents.[50][51][52] In terms of lives lost per unit of energy generated, analysis has determined that nuclear power has caused less fatalities per unit of energy generated than the other major sources of energy generation. Energy production from coal, petroleum, natural gas and hydropower has caused a greater number of fatalities per unit of energy generated due to air pollution and energy accident effects.[53][54][55][56][57] However, the economic costs of nuclear power accidents is high, and meltdowns can take decades to clean up. The human costs of evacuations of affected populations and lost livelihoods is also significant.[58][59]

Along with other sustainable energy sources, nuclear power is a low carbon power generation method of producing electricity, with an analysis of the literature on its total life cycle emission intensity finding that it is similar to other renewable sources in a comparison of greenhouse gas(GHG) emissions per unit of energy generated.[60] With this translating into, from the beginning of nuclear power station commercialization in the 1970s, having prevented the emission of approximately 64 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent(GtCO2-eq) greenhouse gases, gases that would have otherwise resulted from the burning of fossil fuels in thermal power stations.[61]

As of 2012, according to the IAEA, worldwide there were 68 civil nuclear power reactors under construction in 15 countries,[36] approximately 28 of which in the Peoples Republic of China (PRC), with the most recent nuclear power reactor, as of May 2013, to be connected to the electrical grid, occurring on February 17, 2013 in Hongyanhe Nuclear Power Plant in the PRC.[62] In the USA, two new Generation III reactors are under construction at Vogtle. U.S. nuclear industry officials expect five new reactors to enter service by 2020, all at existing plants.[63] In 2013, four aging, uncompetitive, reactors were permanently closed.[64][65]

Japan's 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident, which occurred in a reactor design from the 1960s, prompted a rethink of nuclear safety and nuclear energy policy in many countries.[66] Germany decided to close all its reactors by 2022, and Italy has banned nuclear power.[66] Following Fukushima, in 2011 the International Energy Agency halved its estimate of additional nuclear generating capacity to be built by 2035.[67][68]

Fission economics

The economics of new nuclear power plants is a controversial subject, since there are diverging views on this topic, and multi-billion dollar investments ride on the choice of an energy source. Nuclear power plants typically have high capital costs for building the plant, but low direct fuel costs.
In recent years there has been a slowdown of electricity demand growth and financing has become more difficult, which has an impact on large projects such as nuclear reactors, with very large upfront costs and long project cycles which carry a large variety of risks.[69] In Eastern Europe, a number of long-established projects are struggling to find finance, notably Belene in Bulgaria and the additional reactors at Cernavoda in Romania, and some potential backers have pulled out.[69] Where cheap gas is available and its future supply relatively secure, this also poses a major problem for nuclear projects.[69]

Analysis of the economics of nuclear power must take into account who bears the risks of future uncertainties. To date all operating nuclear power plants were developed by state-owned or regulated utility monopolies[70][71] where many of the risks associated with construction costs, operating performance, fuel price, and other factors were borne by consumers rather than suppliers. Many countries have now liberalized the electricity market where these risks, and the risk of cheaper competitors emerging before capital costs are recovered, are borne by plant suppliers and operators rather than consumers, which leads to a significantly different evaluation of the economics of new nuclear power plants.[72]

Two of the four EPRs under construction (in Finland and France) are significantly behind schedule and substantially over cost.[73] Following the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, costs are likely to go up for currently operating and new nuclear power plants, due to increased requirements for on-site spent fuel management and elevated design basis threats.[74]

Nuclear power debate


The 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, the second worst nuclear incident, displaced 50,000 households after radioactive material leaked into the air, soil and sea.[75] Radiation checks led to bans on some shipments of vegetables and fish.[76]

The nuclear power debate is about the controversy[77][78][79][80][81] which has surrounded the deployment and use of nuclear fission reactors to generate electricity from nuclear fuel for civilian purposes. The debate about nuclear power peaked during the 1970s and 1980s, when it "reached an intensity unprecedented in the history of technology controversies", in some countries.[82][83]

Proponents of nuclear energy argue that nuclear power is a sustainable energy source which reduces carbon emissions and can increase energy security if its use supplants a dependence on imported fuels.[84] Proponents advance the notion that nuclear power produces virtually no air pollution, in contrast to the chief viable alternative of fossil fuel. Proponents also believe that nuclear power is the only viable course to achieve energy independence for most Western countries. They emphasize that the risks of storing waste are small and can be further reduced by using the latest technology in newer reactors, and the operational safety record in the Western world is excellent when compared to the other major kinds of power plants.[85]

Opponents say that nuclear power poses numerous threats to people and the environment and point to studies in the literature that question if it will ever be a sustainable energy source.[86] These threats include health risks and environmental damage from uranium mining, processing and transport, the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation or sabotage, and the unsolved problem of radioactive nuclear waste.[87][88][89] They also contend that reactors themselves are enormously complex machines where many things can and do go wrong, and there have been many serious nuclear accidents.[90][91] Critics do not believe that these risks can be reduced through new technology.[92] They argue that when all the energy-intensive stages of the nuclear fuel chain are considered, from uranium mining to nuclear decommissioning, nuclear power is not a low-carbon electricity source.[93][94][95]
refer to caption and image description
Global public support for energy sources, based on a survey by Ipsos (2011).[96]

Renewable sources


Wind, sun, and biomass are three renewable energy sources.

Renewable energy is generally defined as energy that comes from resources which are naturally replenished on a human timescale such as sunlight, wind, rain, tides, waves and geothermal heat.[97] Renewable energy replaces conventional fuels in four distinct areas: electricity generation, hot water/space heating, motor fuels, and rural (off-grid) energy services.[98]

About 16% of global final energy consumption presently comes from renewable resources, with 10% [99] of all energy from traditional biomass, mainly used for heating, and 3.4% from hydroelectricity. New renewables (small hydro, modern biomass, wind, solar, geothermal, and biofuels) account for another 3% and are growing rapidly.[100] At the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply. National renewable energy markets are projected to continue to grow strongly in the coming decade and beyond.[101] Wind power, for example, is growing at the rate of 30% annually, with a worldwide installed capacity of 282,482 megawatts (MW) at the end of 2012.

Renewable energy resources exist over wide geographical areas, in contrast to other energy sources, which are concentrated in a limited number of countries. Rapid deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency is resulting in significant energy security, climate change mitigation, and economic benefits.[102] In international public opinion surveys there is strong support for promoting renewable sources such as solar power and wind power.[103]

While many renewable energy projects are large-scale, renewable technologies are also suited to rural and remote areas and developing countries, where energy is often crucial in human development.[104] United Nations' Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has said that renewable energy has the ability to lift the poorest nations to new levels of prosperity.[105]

Hydroelectricity


The 22,500 MW Three Gorges Dam in China – the world's largest hydroelectric power station

Hydroelectricity is the term referring to electricity generated by hydropower; the production of electrical power through the use of the gravitational force of falling or flowing water. It is the most widely used form of renewable energy, accounting for 16 percent of global electricity generation – 3,427 terawatt-hours of electricity production in 2010,[106] and is expected to increase about 3.1% each year for the next 25 years.

Hydropower is produced in 150 countries, with the Asia-Pacific region generating 32 percent of global hydropower in 2010. China is the largest hydroelectricity producer, with 721 terawatt-hours of production in 2010, representing around 17 percent of domestic electricity use. There are now three hydroelectricity plants larger than 10 GW: the Three Gorges Dam in China, Itaipu Dam across the Brazil/Paraguay border, and Guri Dam in Venezuela.[106]

The cost of hydroelectricity is relatively low, making it a competitive source of renewable electricity. The average cost of electricity from a hydro plant larger than 10 megawatts is 3 to 5 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour.[106] Hydro is also a flexible source of electricity since plants can be ramped up and down very quickly to adapt to changing energy demands. However, damming interrupts the flow of rivers and can harm local ecosystems, and building large dams and reservoirs often involves displacing people and wildlife.[106] Once a hydroelectric complex is constructed, the project produces no direct waste, and has a considerably lower output level of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO
2
) than fossil fuel powered energy plants.[107]

Wind power: worldwide installed capacity (c. May 2011)[108][109]

Wind


Burbo Bank Offshore Wind Farm, at the entrance to the River Mersey in North West England

Wind (primary renewable natural) power harnesses the power of the wind to propel the blades of wind turbines. These turbines cause the rotation of magnets, which creates electricity. Wind towers are usually built together on wind farms. There are offshore and onshore wind farms. Global wind power capacity has expanded rapidly to 336 GW in June 2014, and wind energy production was around 4% of total worldwide electricity usage, and growing rapidly.[110]

Wind power is widely used in Europe, Asia, and the United States.[111] Several countries have achieved relatively high levels of wind power penetration, such as 21% of stationary electricity production in Denmark,[112] 18% in Portugal,[112] 16% in Spain,[112] 14% in Ireland,[113] and 9% in Germany in 2010.[112][114] By 2011, at times over 50% of electricity in Germany and Spain came from wind and solar power.[115][116] As of 2011, 83 countries around the world are using wind power on a commercial basis.[114]

Many of the world's largest onshore wind farms are located in the United States, China, and India. Most of the world's largest offshore wind farms are located in Denmark, Germany and the United Kingdom. The two largest offshore wind farm are currently the 630 MW London Array and Gwynt y Môr.
Large onshore wind farms
Wind farm Current
capacity
(MW)
Country Notes
Alta (Oak Creek-Mojave) 1,320  United States [117]
Jaisalmer Wind Park 1,064  India [118]
Capricorn Ridge Wind Farm 662.5  United States [119][120]
Fântânele-Cogealac Wind Farm 600  Romania [121]
Fowler Ridge Wind Farm 599.8  United States [122]
Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center 735.5  United States [119][120]
Roscoe Wind Farm 781.5  United States [123]

Solar[edit]

Part of the 354 MW SEGS solar complex in northern San Bernardino County, California
The 150 MW Andasol Solar Power Station is a concentrated solar power plant, located in Spain.

Solar energy, radiant light and heat from the sun, is harnessed using a range of ever-evolving technologies such as solar heating, solar photovoltaics, solar thermal electricity, solar architecture and artificial photosynthesis.[124][125]

Solar technologies are broadly characterized as either passive solar or active solar depending on the way they capture, convert and distribute solar energy. Active solar techniques include the use of photovoltaic panels and solar thermal collectors to harness the energy. Passive solar techniques include orienting a building to the Sun, selecting materials with favorable thermal mass or light dispersing properties, and designing spaces that naturally circulate air.

In 2011, the International Energy Agency said that "the development of affordable, inexhaustible and clean solar energy technologies will have huge longer-term benefits. It will increase countries’ energy security through reliance on an indigenous, inexhaustible and mostly import-independent resource, enhance sustainability, reduce pollution, lower the costs of mitigating climate change, and keep fossil fuel prices lower than otherwise. These advantages are global. Hence the additional costs of the incentives for early deployment should be considered learning investments; they must be wisely spent and need to be widely shared".[124]

Photovoltaics (PV) is a method of generating electrical power by converting solar radiation into direct current electricity using semiconductors that exhibit the photovoltaic effect. Photovoltaic power generation employs solar panels composed of a number of solar cells containing a photovoltaic material. Materials presently used for photovoltaics include monocrystalline silicon, polycrystalline silicon, amorphous silicon, cadmium telluride, and copper indium gallium selenide/sulfide. Due to the increased demand for renewable energy sources, the manufacturing of solar cells and photovoltaic arrays has advanced considerably in recent years.

Solar photovoltaics is a sustainable energy source.[126] By the end of 2011, a total of 71.1 GW[127] had been installed, sufficient to generate 85 TWh/year.[128] And by end of 2012, the 100 GW installed capacity milestone was achieved.[129] Solar photovoltaics is now, after hydro and wind power, the third most important renewable energy source in terms of globally installed capacity. More than 100 countries use solar PV. Installations may be ground-mounted (and sometimes integrated with farming and grazing) or built into the roof or walls of a building (either building-integrated photovoltaics or simply rooftop).

Driven by advances in technology and increases in manufacturing scale and sophistication, the cost of photovoltaics has declined steadily since the first solar cells were manufactured,[130] and the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) from PV is competitive with conventional electricity sources in an expanding list of geographic regions. Net metering and financial incentives, such as preferential feed-in tariffs for solar-generated electricity, have supported solar PV installations in many countries.[131] The Energy Payback Time (EPBT), also known as energy amortization, depends on the location's annual solar insolation and temperature profile, as well as on the used type of PV-technology. For conventional crystalline silicon photovoltaics, the EPBT is higher than for thin-film technologies such as CdTe-PV or CPV-systems. Moreover, the payback time decreased in the recent years due to a number of improvements such as solar cell efficiency and more economic manufacturing processes. As of 2014, photovoltaics recoup on average the energy needed to manufacture them in 0.7 to 2 years. This results in about 95% of net-clean energy produced by a solar rooftop PV system over a 30-year life-time.[132]:30

Biofuels

A bus fueled by biodiesel
Information on pump regarding ethanol fuel blend up to 10%, California

A biofuel is a fuel that contains energy from geologically recent carbon fixation. These fuels are produced from living organisms. Examples of this carbon fixation occur in plants and microalgae. These fuels are made by a biomass conversion (biomass refers to recently living organisms, most often referring to plants or plant-derived materials). This biomass can be converted to convenient energy containing substances in three different ways: thermal conversion, chemical conversion, and biochemical conversion. This biomass conversion can result in fuel in solid, liquid, or gas form. This new biomass can be used for biofuels. Biofuels have increased in popularity because of rising oil prices and the need for energy security.

Bioethanol is an alcohol made by fermentation, mostly from carbohydrates produced in sugar or starch crops such as corn or sugarcane. Cellulosic biomass, derived from non-food sources, such as trees and grasses, is also being developed as a feedstock for ethanol production. Ethanol can be used as a fuel for vehicles in its pure form, but it is usually used as a gasoline additive to increase octane and improve vehicle emissions. Bioethanol is widely used in the USA and in Brazil. Current plant design does not provide for converting the lignin portion of plant raw materials to fuel components by fermentation.

Biodiesel is made from vegetable oils and animal fats. Biodiesel can be used as a fuel for vehicles in its pure form, but it is usually used as a diesel additive to reduce levels of particulates, carbon monoxide, and hydrocarbons from diesel-powered vehicles. Biodiesel is produced from oils or fats using transesterification and is the most common biofuel in Europe.

In 2010, worldwide biofuel production reached 105 billion liters (28 billion gallons US), up 17% from 2009,[133] and biofuels provided 2.7% of the world's fuels for road transport, a contribution largely made up of ethanol and biodiesel.[citation needed] Global ethanol fuel production reached 86 billion liters (23 billion gallons US) in 2010, with the United States and Brazil as the world's top producers, accounting together for 90% of global production. The world's largest biodiesel producer is the European Union, accounting for 53% of all biodiesel production in 2010.[133] As of 2011, mandates for blending biofuels exist in 31 countries at the national level and in 29 states or provinces.[114] The International Energy Agency has a goal for biofuels to meet more than a quarter of world demand for transportation fuels by 2050 to reduce dependence on petroleum and coal.[134]

Geothermal


Geothermal energy is thermal energy generated and stored in the Earth. Thermal energy is the energy that determines the temperature of matter. The geothermal energy of the Earth's crust originates from the original formation of the planet (20%) and from radioactive decay of minerals (80%).[135] The geothermal gradient, which is the difference in temperature between the core of the planet and its surface, drives a continuous conduction of thermal energy in the form of heat from the core to the surface. The adjective geothermal originates from the Greek roots γη (ge), meaning earth, and θερμος (thermos), meaning hot.

Earth's internal heat is thermal energy generated from radioactive decay and continual heat loss from Earth's formation. Temperatures at the core-mantle boundary may reach over 4000 °C (7,200 °F).[136] The high temperature and pressure in Earth's interior cause some rock to melt and solid mantle to behave plastically, resulting in portions of mantle convecting upward since it is lighter than the surrounding rock. Rock and water is heated in the crust, sometimes up to 370 °C (700 °F).[137]

From hot springs, geothermal energy has been used for bathing since Paleolithic times and for space heating since ancient Roman times, but it is now better known for electricity generation. Worldwide, 11,400 megawatts (MW) of geothermal power is online in 24 countries in 2012.[138] An additional 28 gigawatts of direct geothermal heating capacity is installed for district heating, space heating, spas, industrial processes, desalination and agricultural applications in 2010.[139]

Geothermal power is cost effective, reliable, sustainable, and environmentally friendly,[140] but has historically been limited to areas near tectonic plate boundaries. Recent technological advances have dramatically expanded the range and size of viable resources, especially for applications such as home heating, opening a potential for widespread exploitation. Geothermal wells release greenhouse gases trapped deep within the earth, but these emissions are much lower per energy unit than those of fossil fuels. As a result, geothermal power has the potential to help mitigate global warming if widely deployed in place of fossil fuels.

The Earth's geothermal resources are theoretically more than adequate to supply humanity's energy needs, but only a very small fraction may be profitably exploited. Drilling and exploration for deep resources is very expensive. Forecasts for the future of geothermal power depend on assumptions about technology, energy prices, subsidies, and interest rates. Pilot programs like EWEB's customer opt in Green Power Program [141] show that customers would be willing to pay a little more for a renewable energy source like geothermal. But as a result of government assisted research and industry experience, the cost of generating geothermal power has decreased by 25% over the past two decades.[142] In 2001, geothermal energy cost between two and ten US cents per kWh.[143]

100% renewable energy

The incentive to use 100% renewable energy, for electricity, transport, or even total primary energy supply globally, has been motivated by global warming and other ecological as well as economic concerns. Renewable energy use has grown much faster than anyone anticipated.[144] The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said that there are few fundamental technological limits to integrating a portfolio of renewable energy technologies to meet most of total global energy demand.[145] At the national level, at least 30 nations around the world already have renewable energy contributing more than 20% of energy supply. Also, Professors S. Pacala and Robert H. Socolow have developed a series of “stabilization wedges” that can allow us to maintain our quality of life while avoiding catastrophic climate change, and "renewable energy sources," in aggregate, constitute the largest number of their "wedges." [146]

Mark Z. Jacobson says producing all new energy with wind power, solar power, and hydropower by 2030 is feasible and existing energy supply arrangements could be replaced by 2050. Barriers to implementing the renewable energy plan are seen to be "primarily social and political, not technological or economic". Jacobson says that energy costs with a wind, solar, water system should be similar to today's energy costs.[147]

Similarly, in the United States, the independent National Research Council has noted that “sufficient domestic renewable resources exist to allow renewable electricity to play a significant role in future electricity generation and thus help confront issues related to climate change, energy security, and the escalation of energy costs … Renewable energy is an attractive option because renewable resources available in the United States, taken collectively, can supply significantly greater amounts of electricity than the total current or projected domestic demand." .[148]

Critics of the "100% renewable energy" approach include Vaclav Smil and James E. Hansen. Smil and Hansen are concerned about the variable output of solar and wind power, but many other scientists and engineers have analysed this situation and said that the electricity grid can cope.[149]

Increased energy efficiency


A spiral-type integrated compact fluorescent lamp, which has been popular among North American consumers since its introduction in the mid-1990s.[150]

Although increasing the efficiency of energy use is not energy development per se, it may be considered under the topic of energy development since it makes existing energy sources available to do work.[151]:22

Efficient energy use, simply called energy efficiency, is the goal of efforts to reduce the amount of energy required to provide products and services. For example, insulating a home allows a building to use less heating and cooling energy to achieve and maintain a comfortable temperature. Installing fluorescent lights or natural skylights reduces the amount of energy required to attain the same level of illumination compared to using traditional incandescent light bulbs. Compact fluorescent lights use two-thirds less energy and may last 6 to 10 times longer than incandescent lights. Improvements in energy efficiency are most often achieved by adopting an efficient technology or production process.[152]

There are various motivations to improve energy efficiency. Reducing energy use reduces energy costs and may result in a financial cost saving to consumers if the energy savings offset any additional costs of implementing an energy efficient technology. Reducing energy use is also seen as a key solution to the problem of reducing emissions. According to the International Energy Agency, improved energy efficiency in buildings, industrial processes and transportation could reduce the world's energy needs in 2050 by one third, and help control global emissions of greenhouse gases.[153]

Energy efficiency and renewable energy are said to be the twin pillars of sustainable energy policy.[154] In many countries energy efficiency is also seen to have a national security benefit because it can be used to reduce the level of energy imports from foreign countries and may slow down the rate at which domestic energy resources are depleted.

Transmission


An elevated section of the Alaska Pipeline

While new sources of energy are only rarely discovered or made possible by new technology, distribution technology continually evolves.[155] The use of fuel cells in cars, for example, is an anticipated delivery technology.[156] This section presents the various delivery technologies that have been important to historic energy development. They all rely in way on the energy sources listed in the previous section.

Shipping and pipelines

Shipping is a flexible delivery technology that is used in the whole range of energy development regimes from primitive to highly advanced. Currently, coal, petroleum and their derivatives are delivered by shipping via boat, rail, or road. Petroleum and natural gas may also be delivered via pipeline and coal via a Slurry pipeline. Refined hydrocarbon fuels such as gasoline and LPG may also be delivered via aircraft. Natural gas pipelines must maintain a certain minimum pressure to function correctly. Ethanol's corrosive properties make it harder to build ethanol pipelines. The higher costs of ethanol transportation and storage are often prohibitive.[157] Geomagnetically induced currents, seen as interfering with the normal operation of long buried pipeline systems, are a manifestation[158][159] at ground level of space weather that occur due to time-varying ionospheric source fields and the conductivity of the Earth.

Wired energy transfer


Electrical grid – Pylons and cables distribute power

Electricity grids are the networks used to transmit and distribute power from production source to end user, when the two may be hundreds of kilometres away. Sources include electrical generation plants such as a nuclear reactor, coal burning power plant, etc. A combination of sub-stations, transformers, towers, cables, and piping are used to maintain a constant flow of electricity. Grids may suffer from transient blackouts and brownouts, often due to weather damage. During certain extreme space weather events solar wind can interfere with transmissions. Grids also have a predefined carrying capacity or load that cannot safely be exceeded. When power requirements exceed what's available, failures are inevitable. To prevent problems, power is then rationed.

Industrialised countries such as Canada, the US, and Australia are among the highest per capita consumers of electricity in the world, which is possible thanks to a widespread electrical distribution network. The US grid is one of the most advanced, although infrastructure maintenance is becoming a problem. CurrentEnergy provides a realtime overview of the electricity supply and demand for California, Texas, and the Northeast of the US. African countries with small scale electrical grids have a correspondingly low annual per capita usage of electricity. One of the most powerful power grids in the world supplies power to the state of Queensland, Australia.

Wireless energy transfer

Wireless energy transfer is a process whereby electrical energy is transmitted from a power source to an electrical load that does not have a built-in power source, without the use of interconnecting wires.

Storage


Energy storage is accomplished by devices or physical media that store energy to perform useful operation at a later time. A device that stores energy is sometimes called an accumulator.
All forms of energy are either potential energy (e.g. Chemical, gravitational, electrical energy, temperature differential, latent heat, etc.) or kinetic energy (e.g. momentum). Some technologies provide only short-term energy storage, and others can be very long-term such as power to gas using hydrogen or methane and the storage of heat or cold between opposing seasons in deep aquifers or bedrock. A wind-up clock stores potential energy (in this case mechanical, in the spring tension), a battery stores readily convertible chemical energy to operate a mobile phone, and a hydroelectric dam stores energy in a reservoir as gravitational potential energy. Ice storage tanks store ice (thermal energy in the form of latent heat) at night to meet peak demand for cooling. Fossil fuels such as coal and gasoline store ancient energy derived from sunlight by organisms that later died, became buried and over time were then converted into these fuels. Even food (which is made by the same process as fossil fuels) is a form of energy stored in chemical form.

History of energy development


Energy generators past and present at Doel, Belgium: 17th century windmill Scheldemolen and 20th century Doel Nuclear Power Station

Since prehistory, when humanity discovered fire to warm up and roast food, through the Middle Ages in which populations built windmills to grind the wheat, until the modern era in which nations can get electricity splitting the atom. Man has sought endlessly for energy sources[note 21] from which to draw profit, which have been the fossil fuels, on one hand the coal to fuel the steam engines run industrial rails as well as maintain households, and secondly, the oil and its derivatives in the industry and transportation (primarily automotive), although have lived with smaller-scale exploitation of wind power, hydro and biomass. This model of development, however, is based on the depletion of fossil resources from periods of millions years without possibility for replacement as would be required to maintain. The search for energy sources that are inexhaustible and utilization by industrialized countries to strengthen their national economies by reducing its dependence on fossil fuels,[note 22] has led to the adoption of nuclear energy and those with sufficient water resources, the intensive hydraulic use of their waterways.

Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the question of the future of energy supplies has been of interest. In 1865, William Stanley Jevons published The Coal Question in which he saw that the reserves of coal were being depleted and that oil was an ineffective replacement. In 1914, U.S. Bureau of Mines stated that the total production was 5.7 billion barrels (910,000,000 m3). In 1956, Geophysicist M. King Hubbert deduces that U.S. oil production will peak between 1965 and 1970 (peaked in 1971) and that oil production will peak "within half a century" on the basis of 1956 data.[note 23] In 1989, predicted peak by Colin Campbell[160] In 2004, OPEC estimated, with substantial investments, it would nearly double oil output by 2025[161]

Sustainability


Energy consumption from 1989 to 1999

The environmental movement has emphasized sustainability of energy use and development.[162] Renewable energy is sustainable in its production; the available supply will not be diminished for the foreseeable future - millions or billions of years. "Sustainability" also refers to the ability of the environment to cope with waste products, especially air pollution. Sources which have no direct waste products (such as wind, solar, and hydropower) are brought up on this point. With global demand for energy growing, the need to adopt various energy sources is growing. Energy conservation is an alternative or complementary process to energy development. It reduces the demand for energy by using it efficiently.

Resilience


Energy consumption per capita (2001). Red hues indicate increase, green hues decrease of consumption during the 1990s.

Some observers contend that idea of "energy independence" is an unrealistic[note 24] and opaque concept.[163] The alternative offer of "energy resilience" is a goal aligned with economic, security, and energy realities. The notion of resilience in energy was detailed in the 1982 book Brittle Power: Energy Strategy for National Security.[164] The authors argued that simply switching to domestic energy would not be secure inherently because the true weakness is the interdependent and vulnerable energy infrastructure of the United States. Key aspects such as gas lines and the electrical power grid are centralized and easily susceptible to disruption. They conclude that a "resilient energy supply" is necessary for both national security and the environment. They recommend a focus on energy efficiency and renewable energy that is decentralized.[165]

In 2008, former Intel Corporation Chairman and CEO Andrew Grove looked to energy resilience, arguing that complete independence is unfeasible given the global market for energy.[166] He describes energy resilience as the ability to adjust to interruptions in the supply of energy. To that end, he suggests the U.S. make greater use of electricity.[167] Electricity can be produced from a variety of sources. A diverse energy supply will be less impacted by the disruption in supply of any one source. He reasons that another feature of electrification is that electricity is "sticky" – meaning the electricity produced in the U.S. is to stay there because it cannot be transported overseas. According to Grove, a key aspect of advancing electrification and energy resilience will be converting the U.S. automotive fleet from gasoline-powered to electric-powered. This, in turn, will require the modernization and expansion of the electrical power grid. As organizations such as the Reform Institute have pointed out, advancements associated with the developing smart grid would facilitate the ability of the grid to absorb vehicles en masse connecting to it to charge their batteries.[168]

Present and Future



Outlook—World Energy Consumption by Fuel (as of 2011)[169]
       Liquid fuels incl. Biofuels        Coal        Natural Gas
       Renewable fuels        Nuclear fuels

Increasing share of energy consumption by developing nations[170]
       Industrialized nations
       Developing nations
       EE/Former Soviet Union

Extrapolations from current knowledge to the future offer a choice of energy futures.[171] Predictions parallel the Malthusian catastrophe hypothesis. Numerous are complex models based scenarios as pioneered by Limits to Growth. Modeling approaches offer ways to analyze diverse strategies, and hopefully find a road to rapid and sustainable development of humanity. Short term energy crises are also a concern of energy development. Extrapolations lack plausibility, particularly when they predict a continual increase in oil consumption.[citation needed]

Energy production usually requires an energy investment. Drilling for oil or building a wind power plant requires energy. The fossil fuel resources (see above) that are left are often increasingly difficult to extract and convert. They may thus require increasingly higher energy investments. If investment is greater than the energy produced, than the resource; It is no longer an effective energy source.[172][note 25] This means that resources, the wasteful ones, are not used effectively for energy production.[note 26] Such resources can be exploited economically in order to produce raw materials;[note 27] They then become ordinary mining reserves, economically recoverable are not a positive energy sources. New technology may ameliorate this problem if it can lower the energy investment required to extract and convert the resources, although ultimately basic physics sets limits that cannot be exceeded.

Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%. The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.[173] The peaking of world hydrocarbon production (peak oil) may lead to significant changes, and require sustainable methods of production.[174] One vision of a sustainable energy future involves all human structures on the earth's surface (i.e., buildings, vehicles and roads) doing artificial photosynthesis (using sunlight to split water as a source of hydrogen and absorbing carbon dioxide to make fertilizer) efficiently than plants.[175]

With contemporary space industry's economic activity[176][177] and the related private spaceflight, with the manufacturing industries, that go into Earth's orbit or beyond, delivering them to those regions will require further energy development.[178][179][180][181] Commercialization of space includes satellite navigation systems, satellite television and satellite radio; investments estimated to be $50.8 billion.[182] There are the spaceports of Sweden's gateway, Curaçao's gateway,[note 28] Malaysia's gateway, and America's gateway[note 29] that plans to make personal and commercial suborbital spaceflight for space tourism, space hubs,[note 30] space research, and science education, in-addition to contribute to Earth-based cross-industry innovation. Researchers have contemplated space-based solar power for collecting solar power in space for use on Earth.[note 31][note 32] Space-based solar power only differ from solar and other similar radiant energy collection methods in that the means used to collect energy would reside on an orbiting satellite instead of on Earth's surface. Some projected benefits of such a system are a higher collection rate and a longer collection period due to the lack of a diffusing and refracting atmosphere and nighttime in space.[note 33]

Methane clathrate



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


"Burning ice". Methane, released by heating, burns; water drips.
Inset: clathrate structure (University of Göttingen, GZG. Abt. Kristallographie).
Source: United States Geological Survey.

Methane clathrate (CH4·5.75H2O), also called methane hydrate, hydromethane, methane ice, fire ice, natural gas hydrate, or gas hydrate, is a solid clathrate compound (more specifically, a clathrate hydrate) in which a large amount of methane is trapped within a crystal structure of water, forming a solid similar to ice.[1] Originally thought to occur only in the outer regions of the Solar System, where temperatures are low and water ice is common, significant deposits of methane clathrate have been found under sediments on the ocean floors of the Earth.[2]

Methane clathrates are common constituents of the shallow marine geosphere and they occur in deep sedimentary structures and form outcrops on the ocean floor. Methane hydrates are believed to form by migration of gas from deep along geological faults, followed by precipitation or crystallization, on contact of the rising gas stream with cold sea water. In 2008 research on Antarctic Vostok and EPICA Dome C ice cores revealed that methane clathrates were also present in deep Antarctic ice cores and record a history of atmospheric methane concentrations, dating to 800,000 years ago.[3] The ice-core methane clathrate record is a primary source of data for global warming research, along with oxygen and carbon dioxide.

Structure and composition

The nominal methane clathrate hydrate composition is (CH4)4(H2O)23, or 1 mole of methane for every 5.75 moles of water, corresponding to 13.4% methane by weight, although the actual composition is dependent on how many methane molecules fit into the various cage structures of the water lattice. The observed density is around 0.9 g/cm3, which means that methane hydrate will float to the surface of the sea or of a lake unless it is bound in place by being formed in or anchored to sediment.[4] One litre of fully saturated methane clathrate solid would therefore contain about 120 grams of methane (or around 169 litres of methane gas at 0°C and 1 atm).[nb 1]

Methane forms a structure I hydrate with two dodecahedral (12 vertices, thus 12 water molecules) and six tetradecahedral (14 water molecules) water cages per unit cell. (Because of sharing of water molecules between cages, there are only 46 water molecules per unit cell.) This compares with a hydration number of 20 for methane in aqueous solution.[5] A methane clathrate MAS NMR spectrum recorded at 275 K and 3.1 MPa shows a peak for each cage type and a separate peak for gas phase methane.[citation needed] In 2003, a clay-methane hydrate intercalate was synthesized in which a methane hydrate complex was introduced at the interlayer of a sodium-rich montmorillonite clay. The upper temperature stability of this phase is similar to that of structure I hydrate.[6]

Methane hydrate phase diagram. The horizontal axis shows temperature from -15 to 33 Celsius, the vertical axis shows pressure from 0 to 120,000 kilopascals (0 to 1,184 atmospheres). For example, at 4 Celsius hydrate forms above a pressure of about 50 atmospheres.

Natural deposits


Worldwide distribution of confirmed or inferred offshore gas hydrate-bearing sediments, 1996.
Source: USGS

Gas hydrate-bearing sediment, from the subduction zone off Oregon

Specific structure of a gas hydrate piece, from the subduction zone off Oregon

Methane clathrates are restricted to the shallow lithosphere (i.e. < 2,000 m depth). Furthermore, necessary conditions are found only in either continental sedimentary rocks in polar regions where average surface temperatures are less than 0 °C; or in oceanic sediment at water depths greater than 300 m where the bottom water temperature is around 2 °C. In addition, deep fresh water lakes may host gas hydrates as well, e.g. the fresh water Lake Baikal, Siberia.[7] Continental deposits have been located in Siberia and Alaska in sandstone and siltstone beds at less than 800 m depth. Oceanic deposits seem to be widespread in the continental shelf (see Fig.) and can occur within the sediments at depth or close to the sediment-water interface. They may cap even larger deposits of gaseous methane.[8]

Oceanic

There are two distinct types of oceanic deposit. The most common is dominated (> 99%) by methane contained in a structure I clathrate and generally found at depth in the sediment. Here, the methane is isotopically light (δ13C < -60‰) which indicates that it is derived from the microbial reduction of CO2. The clathrates in these deep deposits are thought to have formed in situ from the microbially produced methane, since the δ13C values of clathrate and surrounding dissolved methane are similar.[8] However, it is also thought that fresh water used in the pressurization of oil and gas wells in permafrost and along the continental shelves world wide, combine with natural methane to form clathrate at depth and pressure, since methane hydrates are more stable in fresh water than in salt water. Local variations may be very common, since the act of forming hydrate, which extracts pure water from saline formation waters, can often lead to local, and potentially significant increases in formation water salinity. Hydrates normally exclude the salt in the pore fluid from which it forms, thus they comprise high electric resistivity just like ice, and sediments containing hydrates have a higher resistivity compared to sediments without gas hydrates (Judge [67])[citation needed].[9]:9

These deposits are located within a mid-depth zone around 300–500 m thick in the sediments (the gas hydrate stability zone, or GHSZ) where they coexist with methane dissolved in the fresh, not salt, pore-waters. Above this zone methane is only present in its dissolved form at concentrations that decrease towards the sediment surface. Below it, methane is gaseous. At Blake Ridge on the Atlantic continental rise, the GHSZ started at 190 m depth and continued to 450 m, where it reached equilibrium with the gaseous phase. Measurements indicated that methane occupied 0-9% by volume in the GHSZ, and ~12% in the gaseous zone.[10][11]

In the less common second type found near the sediment surface some samples have a higher proportion of longer-chain hydrocarbons (< 99% methane) contained in a structure II clathrate. Carbon from this type of clathrate is isotopically heavier (δ13C is -29 to -57 ‰) and is thought to have migrated upwards from deep sediments, where methane was formed by thermal decomposition of organic matter. Examples of this type of deposit have been found in the Gulf of Mexico and the Caspian Sea.[8]

Some deposits have characteristics intermediate between the microbially and thermally sourced types and are considered to be formed from a mixture of the two.

The methane in gas hydrates is dominantly generated by microbial consortia degrading organic matter in low oxygen environments, with the methane itself produced by methanogenic archaea. Organic matter in the uppermost few centimetres of sediments is first attacked by aerobic bacteria, generating CO2, which escapes from the sediments into the water column. Below this region of aerobic activity, anaerobic processes take over, including, successively with depth, the microbial reduction of nitrite/nitrate, metal oxides, and then sulfates are reduced to sulfides. Finally, once sulfate is used up, methanogenesis becomes a dominant pathway for organic carbon remineralization.

If the sedimentation rate is low (about 1 cm/yr), the organic carbon content is low (about 1% ), and oxygen is abundant, aerobic bacteria can use up all the organic matter in the sediments faster than oxygen is depleted, so lower-energy electron acceptors are not used. But where sedimentation rates and the organic carbon content are high, which is typically the case on continental shelves and beneath western boundary current upwelling zones, the pore water in the sediments becomes anoxic at depths of only a few centimeters or less. In such organic-rich marine sediments, sulfate then becomes the most important terminal electron acceptor due to its high concentration in seawater, although it too is depleted by a depth of centimeters to meters. Below this, methane is produced. This production of methane is a rather complicated process, requiring a highly reducing environment (Eh -350 to -450 mV) and a pH between 6 and 8, as well as a complex syntrophic consortia of different varieties of archaea and bacteria, although it is only archaea that actually emit methane.

In some regions (e.g., Gulf of Mexico) methane in clathrates may be at least partially derived from thermal degradation of organic matter, dominantly in petroleum.[12][citation needed] The methane in clathrates typically has a biogenic isotopic signature and highly variable δ13C (-40 to -100‰), with an approximate average of about -65‰ .[13][citation needed][14][citation needed][15] Below the zone of solid clathrates, large volumes of methane may form bubbles of free gas in the sediments.[10][16][17]

The presence of clathrates at a given site can often be determined by observation of a "bottom simulating reflector" (BSR), which is a seismic reflection at the sediment to clathrate stability zone interface caused by the unequal densities of normal sediments and those laced with clathrates.

Reservoir size

The size of the oceanic methane clathrate reservoir is poorly known, and estimates of its size decreased by roughly an order of magnitude per decade since it was first recognized that clathrates could exist in the oceans during the 1960s and '70s.[18] The highest estimates (e.g. 3×1018 m³)[19] were based on the assumption that fully dense clathrates could litter the entire floor of the deep ocean. Improvements in our understanding of clathrate chemistry and sedimentology have revealed that hydrates form in only a narrow range of depths (continental shelves), at only some locations in the range of depths where they could occur (10-30% of the GHSZ), and typically are found at low concentrations (0.9-1.5% by volume) at sites where they do occur. Recent estimates constrained by direct sampling suggest the global inventory occupies between 1×1015and 5×1015 m³ (0.24 to 1.2 million cubic miles).[18] This estimate, corresponding to 500-2500 gigatonnes carbon (Gt C), is smaller than the 5000 Gt C estimated for all other geo-organic fuel reserves but substantially larger than the ~230 Gt C estimated for other natural gas sources.[18][20] The permafrost reservoir has been estimated at about 400 Gt C in the Arctic,[21][citation needed] but no estimates have been made of possible Antarctic reservoirs. These are large amounts; for comparison the total carbon in the atmosphere is around 800 gigatons (see Carbon: Occurrence).

These modern estimates are notably smaller than the 10,000 to 11,000 Gt C (2×1016 m³) proposed[22] by previous workers a reason to consider clathrates to be a geo-organic fuel resource (MacDonald 1990, Kvenvolden 1998). Lower abundances of clathrates do not rule out their economic potential, but a lower total volume and apparently low concentration at most sites[18] does suggest that only a limited percentage of clathrates deposits may provide an economically viable resource.

Continental

Methane clathrates in continental rocks are trapped in beds of sandstone or siltstone at depths of less than 800 m. Sampling indicates they are formed from a mix of thermally and microbially derived gas from which the heavier hydrocarbons were later selectively removed. These occur in Alaska, Siberia, and Northern Canada.

In 2008, Canadian and Japanese researchers extracted a constant stream of natural gas from a test project at the Mallik gas hydrate site in the Mackenzie River delta. This was the second such drilling at Mallik: the first took place in 2002 and used heat to release methane. In the 2008 experiment, researchers were able to extract gas by lowering the pressure, without heating, requiring significantly less energy.[23] The Mallik gas hydrate field was first discovered by Imperial Oil in 1971-1972.[24]

Commercial use

The sedimentary methane hydrate reservoir probably contains 2–10 times the currently known reserves of conventional natural gas, as of 2013.[25] This represents a potentially important future source of hydrocarbon fuel. However, in the majority of sites deposits are thought to be too dispersed for economic extraction.[18] Other problems facing commercial exploitation are detection of viable reserves and development of the technology for extracting methane gas from the hydrate deposits.

A research and development project in Japan is aiming for commercial-scale extraction near Aichi Prefecture by 2016.[26][27] In August 2006, China announced plans to spend 800 million yuan (US$100 million) over the next 10 years to study natural gas hydrates.[28] A potentially economic reserve in the Gulf of Mexico may contain approximately 100 billion cubic metres (3.5×10^12 cu ft) of gas.[18] Bjørn Kvamme and Arne Graue at the Institute for Physics and technology at the University of Bergen have developed a method for injecting CO
2
into hydrates and reversing the process; thereby extracting CH4 by direct exchange.[29] The University of Bergen's method is being field tested by ConocoPhillips and state-owned Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC), and partially funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. The project has already reached injection phase and was analyzing resulting data by March 12, 2012.[30]

On March 12, 2013, JOGMEC researchers announced that they had successfully extracted natural gas from frozen methane hydrate.[31] In order to extract the gas, specialized equipment was used to drill into and depressurize the hydrate deposits, causing the methane to separate from the ice. The gas was then collected and piped to surface where it was ignited to prove its presence.[32] According to an industry spokesperson, "It [was] the world's first offshore experiment producing gas from methane hydrate".[31] Previously, gas had been extracted from onshore deposits, but never from offshore deposits which are much more common.[32] The hydrate field from which the gas was extracted is located 50 kilometres (31 mi) from central Japan in the Nankai Trough, 300 metres (980 ft) under the sea.[31][32] A spokesperson for JOGMEC remarked "Japan could finally have an energy source to call its own".[32] The experiment will continue for two weeks before it is determined how efficient the gas extraction process has been.[32] Marine geologist Mikio Satoh remarked "Now we know that extraction is possible. The next step is to see how far Japan can get costs down to make the technology economically viable."[32] Japan estimates that there are at least 1.1 trillion cubic meters of methane trapped in the Nankai Trough, enough to meet the country's needs for more than ten years.[32]

Hydrates in natural gas processing

Routine operations

Methane clathrates (hydrates) are also commonly formed during natural gas production operations, when liquid water is condensed in the presence of methane at high pressure. It is known that larger hydrocarbon molecules like ethane and propane can also form hydrates, although longer molecules (butanes, pentanes) cannot fit into the water cage structure and tend to destabilise the formation of hydrates.

Once formed, hydrates can block pipeline and processing equipment. They are generally then removed by reducing the pressure, heating them, or dissolving them by chemical means (methanol is commonly used). Care must be taken to ensure that the removal of the hydrates is carefully controlled, because of the potential for the hydrate to undergo a phase transition from the solid hydrate to release water and gaseous methane at a high rate when the pressure is reduced. The rapid release of methane gas in a closed system can result in a rapid increase in pressure.[4]

It is generally preferable to prevent hydrates from forming or blocking equipment. This is commonly achieved by removing water, or by the addition of ethylene glycol (MEG) or methanol, which act to depress the temperature at which hydrates will form (i.e. common antifreeze). In recent years, development of other forms of hydrate inhibitors have been developed, like Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors (which by far slow the rate of hydrate formation) and anti-agglomerates, which do not prevent hydrates forming, but do prevent them sticking together to block equipment.

Effect of hydrate phase transition during deep water drilling

When drilling in oil- and gas-bearing formations submerged in deep water, the reservoir gas may flow into the well bore and form gas hydrates owing to the low temperatures and high pressures found during deep water drilling. The gas hydrates may then flow upward with drilling mud or other discharged fluids. When the hydrates rise, the pressure in the annulus decreases and the hydrates dissociate into gas and water. The rapid gas expansion ejects fluid from the well, reducing the pressure further, which leads to more hydrate dissociation and further fluid ejection. The resulting violent expulsion of fluid from the annulus is one potential cause or contributor to the "kick".[33] (Kicks, which can cause blowouts, typically do not involve hydrates: see Blowout: formation kick).
Measures which reduce the risk of hydrate formation include:
  • High flow-rates, which limit the time for hydrate formation in a volume of fluid, thereby reducing the kick potential.[33]
  • Careful measuring of line flow to detect incipient hydrate plugging.[33]
  • Additional care in measuring when gas production rates are low and the possibility of hydrate formation is higher than at relatively high gas flow rates.[33]
  • Monitoring of well casing after it is "shut in" (isolated) may indicate hydrate formation. Following "shut in", the pressure rises while gas diffuses through the reservoir to the bore hole; the rate of pressure rise exhibit a reduced rate of increase while hydrates are forming.[33]
  • Additions of energy (e.g., the energy released by setting cement used in well completion) can raise the temperature and convert hydrates to gas, producing a "kick".

Blowout recovery


Concept diagram of oil containment domes, forming upsidedown funnels in order to pipe oil to surface ships. The sunken oil rig is nearby.

At sufficient depths, methane complexes directly with water to form methane hydrates, as was observed during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010. BP engineers developed and deployed a subsea oil recovery system over oil spilling from a deepwater oil well 5,000 feet (1,500 m) below sea level to capture escaping oil. This involved placing a 125-tonne (276,000 lb) dome over the largest of the well leaks and piping it to a storage vessel on the surface.[34] This option had the potential to collect some 85% of the leaking oil but was previously untested at such depths.[34] BP deployed the system on May 7–8, but it failed due to buildup of methane clathrate inside the dome; with its low density of approximately 0.9 g/cm3 the methane hydrates accumulated in the dome, adding buoyancy and obstructing flow.[35]

Methane clathrates and climate change

Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas. Despite its short atmospheric half life of 7 years, methane has a global warming potential of 62 over 20 years and 21 over 100 years (IPCC, 1996; Berner and Berner, 1996; vanLoon and Duffy, 2000). The sudden release of large amounts of natural gas from methane clathrate deposits has been hypothesized as a cause of past and possibly future climate changes. Events possibly linked in this way are the Permian-Triassic extinction event and the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum.
Climate scientists like James E. Hansen predict that methane clathrates in the permafrost regions will be released consequent to global warming, unleashing powerful feedback forces which may cause runaway climate change that cannot be controlled.

Recent research carried out in 2008 in the Siberian Arctic has shown millions of tonnes of methane being released[36][37][38][39][40] with concentrations in some regions reaching up to 100 times above normal.[41]

In their Correspondence in the September 2013 Nature Geoscience journal, Vonk and Gustafsson cautioned that the most probable mechanism to strengthen global warming is large-scale thawing of Arctic permafrost which will release methane clathrate into the atmosphere.[42] While performing research in July in plumes in the East Siberian Arctic Ocean, Gustafsson and Vonk were surprised by the high concentration of methane.[43]

In 2014 based on their research on the northern United States Atlantic marine continental margins from Cape Hatteras to Georges Bank, a group of scientists from the US Geological Survey, the Department of Geosciences, Mississippi State University, Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University and Earth Resources Technology, claimed there was widespread leakage of methane.[44] [45]

Natural gas hydrates versus liquified natural gas in transportation

Since methane clathrates are stable at a higher temperature than liquefied natural gas (LNG) (−20 vs −162 °C), there is some interest in converting natural gas into clathrates rather than liquifying it when transporting it by seagoing vessels. A significant advantage would be that the production of natural gas hydrate (NGH) from natural gas at the terminal would require a smaller refrigeration plant and less energy than LNG would. Offsetting this, for 100 tonnes of methane transported, 750 tonnes of methane hydrate would have to be transported; since this would require a ship of 7.5 times greater displacement, or require more ships, it is unlikely to prove economic.[citation needed]

Nanoporous methane storage – an impossible target?


The structure of one of the best predicted MOFs © Cory Simon
Is it possible to design a material to fulfil current methane storage goals? This is the question that a multi-disciplinary research team set out to answer by rapidly screening hundreds of thousands of possible methane storage materials in a computational study. Methane could reduce global dependence on oil so the search is on for nanoporous materials to act as fuel tanks for this tricky-to-store gas; but things are not looking promising.

‘Natural gas storage in porous materials provides the key advantage of being able to store significant natural gas at low pressures than compressed gas at the same conditions,’ explains engineer Mike Veenstra of Ford Motor Company, US, who was not involved in the research. ‘The advantage of low pressure is the benefit it provides both on-board the vehicle and off-board at the station. On the vehicle, low pressure reduces the tank attributes along with the other components. At the station, low pressure reduces the compressor stages along with the attributes of other components.’

Randall Snurr at Northwestern University, US, Berend Smit at the University of California, Berkeley, US, and their colleagues around the globe are part of the Materials Genome Initiative that intends to revolutionise materials chemistry in the same way the Human Genome Project did for the biological sciences. They have developed a computer algorithm that simulates model structures, and identifies their pore sizes in relation to deliverable methane storage capacity, based on the current idea of what it is possible to make. The simulations are particularly useful for metal–organic frameworks (MOFs), and considering the vast combinations of inorganic and organic molecular building blocks available, few have been synthesised and tested. ‘Experimentalists have synthesised somewhere between 5000 and 10,000 MOFs and less than 250 zeolite structures over several decades. In this computational study, we examined over 650,000 such structures in a much shorter time,’ explains Snurr.

A huge number of materials can be generated by combining metals and organic linkers
The best experimentally measured capacity of any material falls short of the current US Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) methane storage target. Smit says the conventional approach is to rely on experiments to answer questions as to whether the target is feasible or not: ‘Here we make a bold statement: the current approach is not going to get us there.’ Instead, he says that using calculations to rapidly determine relevant methane storage candidates saves valuable time and resources.
‘Here we make a bold statement: the current approach is not going to get us there’
Calculations reveal an optimal pore diameter of around 11Å for methane storage; any larger and the van der Waals interactions between the gas molecules and the pore walls cannot be felt. The ideal material also has a high density of adsorption sites to optimise methane interactions. Comparing the calculated structures against current goals, the researchers quickly established that it may be impossible to reach the desired target using such materials. With a computational infrastructure in place, the effect of different temperatures and pressures on the structures can be readily recalculated, showing how these factors impact on the deliverable methane capacity. However, even by adopting more favourable parameters, no materials were able to reach the ARPA-E target. From the large number of structures examined computationally, the highest predicted deliverable capacity echoes those observed for the current top sorbent materials, meaning that these materials may already be at their limit.

Joe Zhou, an expert in materials at Texas A&M University, US says ‘research in materials science depends on theoretical simulation to set the boundary, guide the synthesis, and eventually confirm the experimental results.’ He says that for methane storage, understanding what is achievable in industry is critical. ‘Generally speaking, theoretical work focusing on enumerating possible materials is common, but to explore the performance limits is a definite step toward guiding the invention of novel materials.’

MOFs and related materials are not only useful for methane storage. The huge amount of computational data from this study can now be data mined to identify their performance in alternative applications. Similar materials genome-style screening studies could be carried out to identify what is realistically possible to achieve in other areas, including lithium-ion batteries and photovoltaics. Smit says, ‘I am fascinated by the insights these screening studies give; normally one can say something about a few materials – now we have insights on the performance of an entire class of materials. This has completely changed my view on how to do materials research.’

References

This article is free to access until 26 March 2015. Download it here:
C M Simon et al, Energy Environ. Sci., 2015, DOI: 10.1039/c4ee03515a

Arctic Sea Ice Extent, January 17, 2015, DMI, Danish Meteorological Institute

Total sea ice extent on the northern hemisphere during the past years, including climate mean; plus/minus 1 standard deviation. The ice extent values are calculated from the ice type data from the Ocean and Sea Ice, Satellite Application Facility (OSISAF), where areas with ice concentration higher than 15% are classified as ice.

The total area of sea ice is the sum of First Year Ice (FYI), Multi Year Ice (MYI) and the area of ambiguous ice types, from the OSISAF ice type product. The total sea ice extent can differ slightly from other sea ice extent estimates. Possible differences between this sea ice extent estimate and others are most likely caused by differences in algorithms and definitions. Some time in 2013 sea ice climatology and anomaly data will become available here.


                       Sea ice extent in recent years for the northern hemisphere.
                       The grey shaded area corresponds to the climate mean
                       plus/minus 1 standard deviation.


The plot above replaces an earlier sea ice extent plot, that was based on data with the coastal zones masked out. This coastal mask implied that the previous sea ice extent estimates were underestimated. The new plot displays absolute sea ice extent estimates. The old plot can still be viewed here for a while.

Child abandonment

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_abandonment ...