Analytics Consent

We use analytics to understand better how people are using this site.

Permit Google Analytics?

Yes No
Skip to main content
Read page text
page 56
the future of energy: beyond the turmoil he biggest challenge for hydrogen is infrastructure. Admittedly, electric cars will need extra charging points in car parks and on streets—and if they are to compete with petrol cars they’ll need the equivalent of filling stations, too. This will require political strategy and investment and it is by no means a problem solved. But unlike hydrogen, electric cars won’t need an entirely new infrastructure to carry the fuel. hen there’s the question of storing the elusive hydrogen atoms. After you have used electricity or heat to split hydrogen from molecules of water or natural gas, you have a very large volume of the lightest element on earth. Even when it’s compressed, you still have to carry a huge tank of fuel that is low in energy density. What’s more, no tank will hold hydrogen for long. The atoms are so tiny that they gradually wriggle through the gaps in steel. o, if the hydrogen economy is in a slump, can electric cars carry us to an oil-free motoring future? It’s not a trivial question—especially in Britain where laws mandating cuts in emissions of carbon dioxide through to 2050 won’t be met unless the vehicle fleet swiftly goes low-carbon. he biggest obstacles at the moment are cost and what motor folk call “range anxiety”—will I run out of charge on the motorway? The Chinese manufacturer BYD (Build Your Dreams), backed by the US billionaire Warren Buffett, is among the frontrunners of those tackling both obstacles. Soon it will demonstrate in Europe one “affordable” model with a claimed range of 186 miles and a 40-minute charge time, along with a dual-fuel SUV said to do 37 miles on a battery to allow commuting and another 308 miles with the petrol engine on board for long journeys. nother way forward is being pioneered by Renault-Nissan’s Better Place project, which will allow flip-out batteries to be stored at filling stations and popped into cars for an “instant” charge, (although this creates a large capital cost for garage owners). Get your solar panels while the subsidies last Current incentives may be too good to survive, says Miles Brignall oy Williamson from Britain’s Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership envisages that plug-in dual-fuel cars are the most likely way forward—maybe with rotary petrol engines or even jet engines to re-charge the batteries on a long journey. Even so, the cost of battery cars is a real drag on the progress of this technology. he Chinese city of Guilin, faced with severe air pollution that is eating away its fabulous limestone crags, announced that it would license scooters only if they were electric. The electric scooter market has boomed and prices have plunged. If an investment scheme offered to pay £1,100 tax-free each year for the next 25 years, in return for an upfront payment of £12,500, the promoters would have people queuing round the block. Yet that’s pretty much the deal that has been on offer since last April, when the then-government revealed the return it would pay to those prepared to install t needs a similarly dramatic initiative on a much bigger scale for battery-powered cars to create a Great Electric Economy. Miles Brignall is a consumer and personal finance writer at the Guardian electricity-generating solar panels on their south-facing roofs. The introduction of the so-called feed-in tariffs followed a campaign by environmental groups to promote an easily installed source of renewable electricity. f you missed it, the offer runs like this. Pay £12,500 to install a typical 2.5kW solar photovoltaic (PV) system to your home, and you will initially be paid 41.3p per kilowatt hour (kWh) generated, dropping to 37.8p in 2013—whether you use the power or not. This might not sound much, but it’s reuters © 54 · prospect · april 2011
page 57
the future of energy: beyond the turmoil roughly four times what you currently pay for your electricity. ssuming you have the right sort of roof, you can expect an annual income of £950 plus £140-a-year savings on your electricity bills, provided you are able to use the power during daylight hours when the panels are working. The tariffs are tax-free and are guaranteed to rise in line with inflation for 25 years. In reality, they come from your electricity supplier, and are paid for by a small levy on every British electricity bill. Not surprisingly, several thousand households have taken up the government’s offer and installed panels. They now have the opportunity of free, green electricity and an equivalent financial return of between 7 per cent and 9 per cent, depending upon whose figures you believe. he scheme was intended to sit at the heart of Britain’s commitment to produce Power of the sun: a photovoltaic array in Colorado (left); solar panels on an outhouse in Northumberland (top, above); a solar “wall” at Napier University, Edinburgh (above) 15 per cent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. However, less than a year since the policy was introduced, people are already asking whether the feed-in tariffs are too generous—not least because the City, sensing easy and sizeable profits, has piled into the market. ome also question whether the scheme is capable of achieving its stated aims. Last year, one of Britain’s most influential environmental campaigners, the Guardian writer George Monbiot, amazed his peers when he denounced the scheme as an £8.6bn “solar panel rip-off.” “Solar PV is a great technology—if you live in southern California. But the further from the equator you travel, the less sense it makes,” he wrote. “It’s not just that the amount of power PV panels produce at this latitude is risible, they also produce it at the wrong time. In hot countries, where air con- ditioning guzzles electricity, peak demand coincides with peak solar radiation. In the UK, peak demand takes place between 5pm and 7pm on winter evenings.” cknowledging that if you own a suitable house and can afford the upfront investment, “you’d be crazy not to cash in,” Monbiot went on to argue that the £8.6bn cost of the scheme would be better spent on large-scale wind and tidal projects, or even on double glazing and loft insulation. His interjection may have surprised environmental campaigners, but it did little to dampen the enthusiasm of a solar industry that can’t hire installers fast enough. Several companies are so attracted by the projected returns that they are offering to fit PV panels on suitable homes at no cost to the householder in return for the 25-year stream of tariff income. “The further you live from the equator, the less sense solar panels make” lsewhere, large “solar farms” are set to spring up across the country. In Cornwall alone, more than 60 domestic and foreign companies have expressed interest in developing schemes that would see significant areas of countryside covered in solar panels. Ministers are increasingly concerned that the tariff levels could have been wrongly set, and environment secretary Chris Huhne in February announced a review, with particular focus on potential payments to largescale producers. o where does this leave individuals wanting to generate low-carbon electricity and make some money at the same time? lan Simpson, sustainable energy adviser to Friends of the Earth, one of the leading campaigners for the introduction of feed-in tariffs, says solar power still has a vital role in Britain’s future energy system. “Solar and wind power already meet the whole of Germany’s weekend energy needs—the UK could achieve the same. The government’s feed-in tariff review sends a confusing message to people thinking about installing solar panels on their homes. But what the government should be doing is trebling targets for running homes and communities on green power. Solar has a big part to play in this, and in creating the thousands of new jobs that go with it.” s Monbiot says, if you have a suitable house and enough cash, it makes a lot of sense to install solar panels. Just don’t hang about—it looks as though this deal is not going to be around forever. april 2011 · prospect · 55

Page Text

View plaintext

the future of energy: beyond the turmoil he biggest challenge for hydrogen is infrastructure. Admittedly, electric cars will need extra charging points in car parks and on streets—and if they are to compete with petrol cars they’ll need the equivalent of filling stations, too. This will require political strategy and investment and it is by no means a problem solved. But unlike hydrogen, electric cars won’t need an entirely new infrastructure to carry the fuel.

hen there’s the question of storing the elusive hydrogen atoms. After you have used electricity or heat to split hydrogen from molecules of water or natural gas, you have a very large volume of the lightest element on earth. Even when it’s compressed, you still have to carry a huge tank of fuel that is low in energy density.

What’s more, no tank will hold hydrogen for long. The atoms are so tiny that they gradually wriggle through the gaps in steel.

o, if the hydrogen economy is in a slump, can electric cars carry us to an oil-free motoring future? It’s not a trivial question—especially in Britain where laws mandating cuts in emissions of carbon dioxide through to 2050 won’t be met unless the vehicle fleet swiftly goes low-carbon.

he biggest obstacles at the moment are cost and what motor folk call “range anxiety”—will I run out of charge on the motorway? The Chinese manufacturer BYD (Build Your Dreams), backed by the US billionaire Warren Buffett, is among the frontrunners of those tackling both obstacles. Soon it will demonstrate in Europe one “affordable” model with a claimed range of 186 miles and a 40-minute charge time, along with a dual-fuel SUV said to do 37 miles on a battery to allow commuting and another 308 miles with the petrol engine on board for long journeys.

nother way forward is being pioneered by Renault-Nissan’s Better Place project, which will allow flip-out batteries to be stored at filling stations and popped into cars for an “instant” charge, (although this creates a large capital cost for garage owners).

Get your solar panels while the subsidies last Current incentives may be too good to survive, says Miles Brignall oy Williamson from Britain’s Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership envisages that plug-in dual-fuel cars are the most likely way forward—maybe with rotary petrol engines or even jet engines to re-charge the batteries on a long journey. Even so, the cost of battery cars is a real drag on the progress of this technology.

he Chinese city of Guilin, faced with severe air pollution that is eating away its fabulous limestone crags, announced that it would license scooters only if they were electric. The electric scooter market has boomed and prices have plunged.

If an investment scheme offered to pay £1,100 tax-free each year for the next 25 years, in return for an upfront payment of £12,500, the promoters would have people queuing round the block. Yet that’s pretty much the deal that has been on offer since last April, when the then-government revealed the return it would pay to those prepared to install t needs a similarly dramatic initiative on a much bigger scale for battery-powered cars to create a Great Electric Economy. Miles Brignall is a consumer and personal finance writer at the Guardian electricity-generating solar panels on their south-facing roofs. The introduction of the so-called feed-in tariffs followed a campaign by environmental groups to promote an easily installed source of renewable electricity.

f you missed it, the offer runs like this. Pay £12,500 to install a typical 2.5kW solar photovoltaic (PV) system to your home, and you will initially be paid 41.3p per kilowatt hour (kWh) generated, dropping to 37.8p in 2013—whether you use the power or not. This might not sound much, but it’s reuters

©

54 · prospect · april 2011

read next page

My Bookmarks

Buy this Book
Skip to main content