Category: Uncategorized

Historic flooding in Canada

Historic flooding in Canada

via Ice Age Now
http://ift.tt/2qcAwB3


State of emergency declared in Montreal, schools closed, military scrambling with relief efforts.

Environment Minister David Heurtel said the speed the water is travelling through the Ottawa River basin is just as problematic as the water levels.

“We’re talking about historic levels of water,” said Heurtel.

Several municipalities, including Montreal, Laval and Rigaud, have declared states of emergency .

Parts of eastern Ontario, Atlantic Canada and British Columbia and have also been hit hard by flooding.

See video:
http://ift.tt/2pTbqd8

Thanks to Ron de Haan for this link


 

The post Historic flooding in Canada appeared first on Ice Age Now.

via Ice Age Now http://ift.tt/2qcAwB3

May 8, 2017 at 07:21AM

Claim: Installing solar will combat national security risks in the power grid

Claim: Installing solar will combat national security risks in the power grid

via Watts Up With That?
http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

From MICHIGAN TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY and the “what happens if they bomb you at night?” department comes this freakishly stupid study that suggests we’ll have better energy security at our military installations by installing solar systems. While microgrids “can” be more reliable that individual grid tied systems, they still don’t generate power when you need it most during a grid induced power outage – at night.

Installing solar to combat national security risks in the power grid

Vulnerabilities in the power grid are one of the most prevalent national security threats. The technical community has called for building up the resiliency of the grid using distributed energy and microgrids for stabilization. Power production from multiple sources increases the difficulty of triggering cascading blackouts, and following an attack or natural disaster, microgrids can provide localized energy security.

In a new paper published in Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, an interdisciplinary team of engineering and energy policy experts from Michigan Technological University says the first step is to outfit military infrastructure with solar photovoltaic (PV)-powered microgrid systems. Their results found that the military needs 17 gigawatts of PV to fortify domestic bases–the systems are technically feasible, within current contractors’ skill sets and economically favorable.

Additionally, the paper’s lead author, Emily Prehoda, who is finishing her PhD in energy policy at Michigan Tech, says boosting bases’ energy independence supports local communities.

“I come from a military-oriented family, so for me the military is important to bridge the technical capacities and policies to trickle down to other critical infrastructure and services,” Prehoda says. “This is such a huge issue, not only for the military but for other organizations, and it hits from all different sides, from the technical, economic and social–and it leads back to the idea of security.”

Independent Energy

The US military already has a renewable energy plan in place: 25 percent of energy production from renewable sources by 2025, but only 27 of the more than 400 domestic military sites either have fortified PV microgrids running now or have plans to do so, which makes the majority vulnerable to long-term power disruptions. Co-author Joshua Pearce says this is a great start but more is needed as most military backup systems rely on generators, which are also vulnerable to fuel supply disruption.

“The US military is extremely dependent on electricity now; it’s not people fighting with bayonets,” says Pearce, a dual-appointed professor of electrical and computer engineering as well as materials science and engineering. “If we put the money into PV-powered microgrids, it would be making us objectively more secure and we get a return on our investment as after the initial investment in PV the military would enjoy free solar electricity for the next 25 years.”

The main historical threats to the electrical grid come from natural disasters like tornados, hurricanes and winter storms, which cost between $18 and $33 billion every year in power outages and US infrastructure damage. The threats that keep grid security experts up at night are deliberate attacks on the grid. These can either be physical attacks–like the 2013 sniper attack on a Silicon Valley substation, which cost $100 million and lasted 27 days –or computer hacking that causes cascading disruptions like in the Ukraine blackouts in 2016. In 2012, the US Department of Defense reported about 200 cyber incidents across critical infrastructure systems and nearly half targeted the electrical grid.

During any event, energy generation and distribution unhitch like a lost caboose on a runaway train. Microgrids provide flexibility and enable generation to persist even if distribution fails, maintaining performance for critical infrastructure while decreasing the chance of cascading failures. Solar, because of its decreasing costs and geographically distributed access to long-term solar “fuel”, makes the most sense for powering microgrids.

PV-Powered Microgrids

To quantify the technical impacts of distributed energy systems, the team looked at domestic military bases and their current electric loads. Then they reviewed where the military’s existing and planned PV-powered microgrids lined up with past grid failures as well as every state’s potential for solar power.

The team found that it would take 2,140 gigawatts to supply all critical infrastructure in the US with 100 percent solar power and a hybrid microgrid system with storage provide protection against grid failure. The military alone would need 17 gigawatts. To put that in perspective, the US has installed a total capacity of 22.7 gigawatts of solar to date.

The team then looked at the technical and economic feasibility of employing the top 20 contractors already working with the US Department of Defense to install more microgrids and performed a detailed case study of three companies, Lockheed Martin, Bechtel and General Electric, to gauge the extent of the technical skills and resources available.

Given the results, the challenge to meet grid resiliency with microgrid deployment is feasible because the resources to install these systems already exist domestically.

Renewable Energy Policy

Prehoda also worked with her PhD adviser Chelsea Schelly, an associate professor of sociology at Michigan Tech, to assess policy needs. Despite the substantial national security risk, policy that addresses electrical grid failures has been minimal. Schelly explains that support for PV makes sense in terms of national security.

“There is some policy recognition that energy can be a security priority,” Schelly says, adding that while the US does not have a national renewable energy policy, the military does, and it has the capacity for implementation through existing contractors. “If we recognize that this capacity already exists, then we can start thinking about PV as a security measure by integrating microgrids–and then creating local resilience based on military technologies.”

In the paper, the team examined how securing top-priority military microgrids could trickle down into different levels of critical infrastructure. Technology designed and implemented at military bases could lead to similar microgrids for other government facilities, critical infrastructure like hospitals, industry and commercial systems as well as homes and neighborhoods.

“For me, starting with the military is important for national security and grid vulnerabilities,” Prehoda says. “But it also jumpstarts technology.”

The first step is recognizing what it takes to outfit domestic military bases–and eventually military sites abroad–to combat power grid failure from natural disasters and terrorist attacks.

###

The full paper is available free and open access at: http://ift.tt/2qKw00z


First, the military already has plenty of backup in the form of diesel generators at most military installations…which can run 24/7, not just when the sun shines. This looks like a sales pitch for solar to me.

Their results found that the military needs 17 gigawatts of PV to fortify domestic bases–the systems are technically feasible, within current contractors’ skill sets and economically favorable.

Second, I generally don’t trust organizations that require me to give them my contact list in order to read the paper: (my email address is obscured on purpose)

Third, a fuel-cell system would be a far better approach, as they run 24/7 and the military has already deployed several:

On July 19, 2011, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced that, as part of an interagency partnership with the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) to strengthen American energy security and develop new clean energy technologies, DOE and DOD will collaborate on a project to install and operate 18 fuel cell backup power systems at eight defense installations across the country. The Departments will test how the fuel cells perform in real world operations, identify any improvements manufacturers could make to enhance the value proposition, and highlight the benefits of fuel cells for emergency backup power applications.

Link: http://ift.tt/2qKeAB0

via Watts Up With That? http://ift.tt/1Viafi3

May 8, 2017 at 05:50AM

Letter To The Telegraph

Letter To The Telegraph

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

By Paul Homewood

 

image

 

 

Heads up for the Telegraph, who have published my letter in response to the one below from Ben Goldsmith:

 

SIR – Charles Moore couldn’t have got it more wrong in writing that climate change fears are elitist and limited to those in metropolitan areas.

MPs up and down the country report increasing numbers of constituents raising this issue with them. There is in fact huge public backing for action on climate change, and in particular support for energy efficiency and renewables.

Moreover, it is a myth that climate policies are driving up energy bills: wind and gas are now demonstrably the cheapest sources of electricity in Britain. Bill-payers are better off as a result of green policy measures which drive greater efficiency. And, ultimately, our economy is stronger because of the world-leading contribution our country makes to green industries.

As we leave the European Union, we must continue to show leadership, encourage innovation, work towards energy self-sufficiency and invest in long-term sustainable energy solutions – no matter what the ever-shrinking collection of climate naysayers do to try to hinder such progress.

Ben Goldsmith
Chairman, Conservative Environment Network
London NW3

The Goldsmith letter aroused a lot of reaction, including these letters:

 

SIR – I wonder which universe Ben Goldsmith (Letters, May 4) is living in.

When he talks about renewable energy costs, I assume he is looking only at the bottom line of his own company, and not at those of manufacturers whose costs are dominated by the price of electricity.

Do his calculations of the benefits of renewables include the cost to workers, companies and the Exchequer of the loss of Britain’s ceramics industry, the aluminium smelting industry and the cement industry due to soaring energy prices?

We almost lost the steelworks in South Wales. That was only saved by the taxpayer funding the carbon taxes that were driving up costs and destroying the company’s ability to compete with producers in countries that are not determined to sacrifice jobs at the altar of renewable energy.

Pamela Wheeler
Shrewsbury, Shropshire

 

SIR – Mr Goldsmith thinks wind and solar panels are now the cheapest sources of electricity in Britain.

He must be unaware that his claim only holds water if government-imposed costs (in the form of arbitrary carbon taxes) are preferentially loaded on to fossil-fuel generators, and if the grid reinforcement and system-balancing costs associated with intermittent renewables are ignored.

Fiona Bick
Westhill, Aberdeenshire

 

SIR – Charles Moore clearly sets out the case for reviewing and reducing energy costs for both businesses and consumers.

Industry needs energy that is competitively priced. Consumers want to know what the real costs are, what taxes are levied and why. A cap on energy bills is just a red herring.

We are entering a new era of supply and storage. It is therefore vital that component costs are clearly identified to enable a proper debate to take place.

Paul Cook
Hayling Island, Hampshire

 

SIR – Britain’s “coal-free” days are celebrated – but ironically they are down to Drax, Europe’s largest coal-fired power station, which, by burning wood, now produces 16 per cent of Britain’s renewable electricity. This wood is grown in the US and brought in on ships that produce more pollution than all the diesel cars in London combined.

Kevin Prescott
Littlehampton, West Sussex

via NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT http://ift.tt/16C5B6P

May 8, 2017 at 05:40AM

New Video : “Are US Springs Getting Hotter And Drier?”

New Video : “Are US Springs Getting Hotter And Drier?”

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog
http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

via The Deplorable Climate Science Blog http://ift.tt/2i1JH7O

May 8, 2017 at 04:58AM