Scottish Government Releases "Renewable Energy Framework"

More interesting energy tidbits from the Scottish Government.

Blueprint for a Greener Scotland - The Scottish Government - 06 Oct 08

"First Minister Alex Salmond launched the Framework at the Scottish School of Forestry in Inverness, which utilises Scotland's forestry resources for sustainable biomass energy.

Mr Salmond said:

'The Renewable Energy Framework takes us closer to our vision of Scotland becoming the green energy capital of Europe by maximising the economic and environmental benefits of renewable energy. Almost half of the energy used in Scotland goes towards heating and hot water. This Framework proposes a tenfold increase in heat energy from renewables to stimulate a diverse and vibrant heat market.

The Framework also proposes an increase in the use of renewable fuel for transport from less than 1 per cent to 10 per cent to reduce carbon emissions. Tackling climate change presents huge opportunities for Scotland and despite the current economic slowdown the country's renewable energy sector is booming.

Renewable energy is at the heart of this Government's vision of increasing sustainable economic growth and development. In recent weeks I have announced £1 billion of investment in renewable projects including the Clyde windfarm, Crystal Rig windfarm and Scottish Power's plans to use the Pentland Firth to generate green electricity.

I am confident we will meet our interim target of 31 per cent of our electricity from renewables by 2011 and with our rich renewables resources we could exceed the 50 per cent target by 2020.'

Framework for the Development and Deployment of Renewables in Scotland [87 pp - PDF] - Scotland.gov.uk

Scottish Government Releases "Renewable Energy Framework"

More interesting energy tidbits from the Scottish Government.

Blueprint for a Greener Scotland - The Scottish Government - 06 Oct 08

"First Minister Alex Salmond launched the Framework at the Scottish School of Forestry in Inverness, which utilises Scotland's forestry resources for sustainable biomass energy.

Mr Salmond said:

'The Renewable Energy Framework takes us closer to our vision of Scotland becoming the green energy capital of Europe by maximising the economic and environmental benefits of renewable energy. Almost half of the energy used in Scotland goes towards heating and hot water. This Framework proposes a tenfold increase in heat energy from renewables to stimulate a diverse and vibrant heat market.

The Framework also proposes an increase in the use of renewable fuel for transport from less than 1 per cent to 10 per cent to reduce carbon emissions. Tackling climate change presents huge opportunities for Scotland and despite the current economic slowdown the country's renewable energy sector is booming.

Renewable energy is at the heart of this Government's vision of increasing sustainable economic growth and development. In recent weeks I have announced £1 billion of investment in renewable projects including the Clyde windfarm, Crystal Rig windfarm and Scottish Power's plans to use the Pentland Firth to generate green electricity.

I am confident we will meet our interim target of 31 per cent of our electricity from renewables by 2011 and with our rich renewables resources we could exceed the 50 per cent target by 2020.'

Framework for the Development and Deployment of Renewables in Scotland [87 pp - PDF] - Scotland.gov.uk

Radioactive Pigs at the Trough

This just in on the federal nuclear loan guarantee applications.

Justing Moody's numbers for the estimated cost per kW you get: 28,800,000 kW x $7,000 per kW = $201,600,000,000 or just over 200 billion buckaroos. It's a good chunk of the $315 billion that McCain's nuclear folly would run.

Energy Department Takes Loan Applications - UPI- 06 Oct 08

"The U.S. Department of Energy announced it has received 19 federal loan applications for nuclear plants.

The applications came from 17 electric power companies to support the building of 14 nuclear power plants and 21 new reactors. An Energy Department representative said there are five reactor designs for the 21 reactors and all five have been certified, or are currently under review for possible certification, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission."

"A new nuclear plant has not been built in the United States for more than 20 years. Industry leaders are asking for $122 billion in loan guarantees, a lot more than the $18.5 billion available under the Nuclear Power Facilities solicitation offered June 30.

Construction of all 14 nuclear plants is estimated to cost about $188 billion, and they are projected to be able to generate 28,800 megawatts."

Radioactive Pigs at the Trough

This just in on the federal nuclear loan guarantee applications.

Justing Moody's numbers for the estimated cost per kW you get: 28,800,000 kW x $7,000 per kW = $201,600,000,000 or just over 200 billion buckaroos. It's a good chunk of the $315 billion that McCain's nuclear folly would run.

Energy Department Takes Loan Applications - UPI- 06 Oct 08

"The U.S. Department of Energy announced it has received 19 federal loan applications for nuclear plants.

The applications came from 17 electric power companies to support the building of 14 nuclear power plants and 21 new reactors. An Energy Department representative said there are five reactor designs for the 21 reactors and all five have been certified, or are currently under review for possible certification, by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission."

"A new nuclear plant has not been built in the United States for more than 20 years. Industry leaders are asking for $122 billion in loan guarantees, a lot more than the $18.5 billion available under the Nuclear Power Facilities solicitation offered June 30.

Construction of all 14 nuclear plants is estimated to cost about $188 billion, and they are projected to be able to generate 28,800 megawatts."

Back to the Future

An interesting if a bit one sided, imo, view of the current energy debate. At least it's asking the right questions. The soft vs. hard terminology originated with Lovin's work in the '70s. Before that, there was little serious debate on utility scale energy developments. Yet another reason to be voting for Obama, imo.

Energy Lessons From the '70s - Hard Power vs. Soft Power - NY Times - 06 Oct 08

"The presidential candidates claim to see America’s energy future, but their competing visions have a certain vintage quality. They’ve revived that classic debate: the hard path versus the soft path.

The soft path, as Amory Lovins defined it in the 1970s, is energy conservation and power from the sun, wind and plants — the technologies that Senator Barack Obama emphasizes in his plan to reduce greenhouse emissions. Senator John McCain is more enthusiastic about building nuclear power plants, the quintessential hard path."

I see the economic report being referenced here is a bit on the old side. And it could be accessed without a fee from the MIT website.

Federal Tax Policy Towards Energy [pp. 33 PDF] - Gilbert E. Metcalf - January 2007

"I find that nuclear power and renewable electricity sources benefit substantially from accelerated depreciation and that the production and investment tax credits make clean coal technologies cost competitive with pulverized coal and wind and biomass cost competitive with natural gas."

Back to the Future

An interesting if a bit one sided, imo, view of the current energy debate. At least it's asking the right questions. The soft vs. hard terminology originated with Lovin's work in the '70s. Before that, there was little serious debate on utility scale energy developments. Yet another reason to be voting for Obama, imo.

Energy Lessons From the '70s - Hard Power vs. Soft Power - NY Times - 06 Oct 08

"The presidential candidates claim to see America’s energy future, but their competing visions have a certain vintage quality. They’ve revived that classic debate: the hard path versus the soft path.

The soft path, as Amory Lovins defined it in the 1970s, is energy conservation and power from the sun, wind and plants — the technologies that Senator Barack Obama emphasizes in his plan to reduce greenhouse emissions. Senator John McCain is more enthusiastic about building nuclear power plants, the quintessential hard path."

I see the economic report being referenced here is a bit on the old side. And it could be accessed without a fee from the MIT website.

Federal Tax Policy Towards Energy [pp. 33 PDF] - Gilbert E. Metcalf - January 2007

"I find that nuclear power and renewable electricity sources benefit substantially from accelerated depreciation and that the production and investment tax credits make clean coal technologies cost competitive with pulverized coal and wind and biomass cost competitive with natural gas."

"90 Percent" is Deterrence

Why are all the Freedonias out there looking to get nuclear power? Here's what Mohammed El-Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, thinks along with some new concerns about Japan.

Spread of Nuclear Capability is Feared - Washington Post - 12 May 08

"Mohammed ElBaradei, the director general of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency and a winner with the IAEA of the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize for his work preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, has likened the pursuit of 'latent' nuclear capability to buying an insurance policy.

'You don't really even need to have a nuclear weapon,' ElBaradei said at a recent international conference of security officials in Munich. 'It's enough to buy yourself an insurance policy by developing the capability, and then sit on it. Let's not kid ourselves: Ninety percent of it is insurance, a deterrence.'"

No More American Umbrella?: Nuclear Temptation in Japan - IHT - 15 Apr 08

"A leading Japanese opposition politician, Ozawa Ichiro, said recently that Beijing's bullying could provoke Japan into producing thousands of nuclear warheads at short notice."

"Few doubt that Japan, given its technological prowess, could produce nuclear weapons and the means of delivery them in a relatively short time. It cooperates fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency, but its large-scale plutonium recycling program creates suspicions that it might have enough fissile material to produce many nuclear weapons."

"90 Percent" is Deterrence

Why are all the Freedonias out there looking to get nuclear power? Here's what Mohammed El-Baradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, thinks along with some new concerns about Japan.

Spread of Nuclear Capability is Feared - Washington Post - 12 May 08

"Mohammed ElBaradei, the director general of the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency and a winner with the IAEA of the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize for his work preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, has likened the pursuit of 'latent' nuclear capability to buying an insurance policy.

'You don't really even need to have a nuclear weapon,' ElBaradei said at a recent international conference of security officials in Munich. 'It's enough to buy yourself an insurance policy by developing the capability, and then sit on it. Let's not kid ourselves: Ninety percent of it is insurance, a deterrence.'"

No More American Umbrella?: Nuclear Temptation in Japan - IHT - 15 Apr 08

"A leading Japanese opposition politician, Ozawa Ichiro, said recently that Beijing's bullying could provoke Japan into producing thousands of nuclear warheads at short notice."

"Few doubt that Japan, given its technological prowess, could produce nuclear weapons and the means of delivery them in a relatively short time. It cooperates fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency, but its large-scale plutonium recycling program creates suspicions that it might have enough fissile material to produce many nuclear weapons."

Yet Another Reason to Use Twitter

http://twitter.com/tinafey

Yet Another Reason to Use Twitter

http://twitter.com/tinafey