Posted by: sustainadelic
on 30 May, 2011
There's been an emerging consensus that the (sustainable) future of cars was electric, with hydrogen the big hope for aviation.
However, a recent article in the Sydney Morning Herald argues that the auto industry is turning away from electric cars.
Getting electric batteries to delivery long-distance driving range at a realistic size and an affordable prices is proving elusive. And while the 100-150km range of an electric battery is fine for everyday city driving 50 weeks of the year, consumers want a car they can also take on holiday a couple of times a year.
One solution to this problem could be the rollout of a battery-switching network, such as that planned by Better Place. Drivers will simply drive into a Better Place station and switch their battery for a fully charged one in a couple of minutes.
If that works, electric cars may overcome the distance problem.
Posted by: sustainadelic
on 22 May, 2011
Hold the front page. The conservative British government has just announced a "carbon budget" that will legally bind the UK to cut its greenhouse emissions to half of their 1990 level by 2027.
Posted by: sustainadelic
on 18 May, 2011
A landmark thousand-page study from the IPCC has concluded that renewable energy can provide 77 per cent of the world's energy by 2050.
Posted by: sustainadelic
on 18 May, 2011
The US climate change organisation 350.org is coordinating another worldwide day of protest and events to call for greater action on climate change. Called Moving Planet, it takes place on 24 September.
Posted by: sustainadelic
on 02 May, 2011
With the nuclear industry on the back foot after the Fukushima reactor crisis in Japan, natural gas is now being positioned as the "only realistic" clean energy option. In the last few years, billions have been poured into gas exploration and development - far more than has gone into developing renewables such as solar or wind. Natural gas is is claimed, generates half the greenhouse gas emissions of coal, making it a valuable transition fuel in any strategy to reduce emissions. But is this true? It's a key question, because if the world invests for gas it will inevitably delay the development of low or zero-carbon renewables such as solar and wind. So if gas doesn't lead to a lower-emissions future, we're in big trouble.
As I've blogged before, it's been suggested that if as little as 2 per cent of gas escapes into the atmosphere - called "fugitive emissions" - the global warming impact of gas could be just as bad than coal. That includes leaks during extraction, flaring to burn off excess gas, leaks while the gas is piped to the user, and even in your home - if, say, you turn your stove on then fumble for a match. Maybe it's no accident that figures for gas leakage are almost impossible to find, but some studies suggest it is not far off the 2 per cent mark. One US Enivonmental Protection Agency study put leakage at 3.3 per cent.
The hot new frontier in the fossil fuel world is shale gas, or coal seam gas - gas trapped in layers or earth and rock, including coal seams, and extracted by a process called hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking", which involves cracking open underground rocks to release the trapped gas. China is about to get into shale gas in a big way.
The Guardian has just produced a special report on shale gas.
Last week, SBS screened a documentary about fracking called Gasland, which has also just been released on DVD in Australia. Coal seam gas featured in a recent Four Corners report.
Critics of fracking say it can release methane locally (as well as carcinogenic chemicals used in the extraction process) including into underground aquifers. Gasland shows methane coming out of the kitchen taps of local residents. Maybe that would be a necessary evil if it reduced emissions. But now a new study claims the fugitive emissions from shale gas might make it worse than coal in terms of emissions.
Ironically, within a decade or two solar power is likely to be competitive with coal and gas. But by then gas extraction, along with coal, may have pumped enough greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to set off disastrous feedback mechanisms, such as the release of methane currenly locked into the frozen tundra in northern Siberia and Canada, that would make global warming unstoppable. Far from saving us, going for gas could turn out to be the greatest mistake in history. With stakes this high, we mustn't just take the word of the gas lobby. Greenhouse emissions from gas must be given the closest scrutiny possible.
