13 years to limitless energy... | Page 7 | Vital Football

13 years to limitless energy...

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-62619313

Why an old train could point to a clean energy future
    • Published

    • 59 minutes ago


_126418993_greengoattrainphoto-credit-h2m.jpg
Image source, H2M
Image caption,
The Green Goat is getting a green refit
By Chris Baraniuk
Technology of Business reporter

An old diesel freight train in British Columbia, Canada is about to get a new lease of life.
Local firm Hydrogen in Motion (H2M) is currently converting the Green Goat locomotive to run on a mix of hydrogen and battery power.
The so-called switcher locomotive performs tasks such as transporting small loads of lumber or animal feed at rail yards.
If all goes to plan, H2M will have the engine running by the end of this year, or early next.
"With the successful demonstration of this we would be looking at much larger trains as well," says H2M president and chief executive Grace Quan. "We'd be looking at converting entire fleets."
Hydrogen, which emits water but no carbon dioxide when burned, is often touted as a fuel of the future.

There are already a few hydrogen-powered trains out there, such as the ones currently being rolled out in the German state of Lower Saxony. The technology made its debut there in 2018.
In the UK, a hydrogen locomotive, HydroFlex2, is undergoing testing in Long Marston, Warwickshire.
But current methods of storing hydrogen in tanks, as a highly pressurised gas or extremely cold (cryogenic) liquid, are expensive and potentially unsafe. Scientists have long aimed to find ways of storing hydrogen in more inert solid forms.
_126415409_gracequan-front-credit-h2m.jpg


This would belie the ability to store hydrogen:

https://www.toyota.com/mirai/2022/
 
Europe is experiencing the pain of a quick transition to green energy.

10 years from now they will be miles ahead.
 
British nuclear fusion start-up plans $570m reactor

First Light Fusion hopes to create factory that will churn out tritium as part of efforts to generate cheap, clean energy


By Rachel Millard 27 November 2022 • 4:00pm

TELEMMGLPICT000223763725_trans_NvBQzQNjv4Bq_015gmpDOnvmuD2JZwtarrYJvz2D91ZdWQrWyAk2K-w.jpeg

First Light Fusion co-founder Nick Hawker believes the new plant will help fusion technology to scale Credit: John Lawrence

A nuclear start-up attempting to crack the “holy grail” of nuclear fusion is planning a new $570m [£500m] pilot plant which will also make crucial fuel.
Oxford-based First Light Fusion is examining sites across Britain for a facility that will use fusion to produce both electricity and tritium, an isotope of hydrogen needed to fuel fusion reactions.
A facility would be used to supply First Light's commercial fusion reactor, which is still under development.
Tritium is extremely scarce and currently costs around $30,000 a gram, with much of the world’s stock already earmarked for other reactors.
First Light Fusion says producing it on site would help commercialise fusion technology, which has been in development for decades.
Nick Hawker, First Light Fusion’s co-founder and chief executive, said: “One of the major engineering challenges of fusion is being able to produce enough tritium yourself.
“With our design approach, that's quite an easy thing to do. So with this pilot plant design we will maximise that strength.
Advertisement


replay-button.png


“It will be designed to over-produce tritium. That will unblock the scalability of the technology, allowing us to scale out many more power plants much more quickly.
“So this pilot plant will provide the fuel for the first generation, the first fleet of our proper commercial plants.”
First Light hopes to get the 60-megawatt pilot plant up and running in the early to mid-2030s. Mr Hawker does not anticipate it will need to sell equity in First Light to fund the plant.
The company is among several worldwide trying to develop nuclear fusion power, which holds the promise of abundant clean energy by replicating the process that powers the sun.
TELEMMGLPICT000223763850_trans_NvBQzQNjv4BqpVlberWd9EgFPZtcLiMQf0Rf_Wk3V23H2268P_XkPxc.jpeg

First Light Fusion uses a 22-metre gas gun to produce energy from tritium and deuterium Credit: John Lawrence
So far, however, developers have not yet managed to produce more electricity than it takes to drive the reaction, known as gain.
First Light Fusion uses a unique approach in which a 22-metre gas gun fires a 100g projectile at 6.5km/second - about twenty times the speed of sound - at a pellet containing tritium and deuterium.
The company ultimately wants to develop power plants which repeat the process every 30 seconds, with every pellet generating enough power to fuel the average UK home for more than two years.
It believes this could eventually produce power for under $50 [£38] per megawatt hour, making it competitive with renewables.
First Light will need to prove “gain” before setting up the new tritium pilot plant - but Mr Hawker is optimistic, noting that underground weapons tests have shown the physics does work.
He said: “I’m very happy with where we’ve got to.
“The biggest risks now are execution risks - getting suppliers to deliver on time; getting planning permission through on time.”
After decades in development, Mr Hawker believes fusion “is going to happen - and it’s going to happen sooner than you might think.”
 
Grant Schapps said there is resistance to on shore wind turbines due to their size making them difficult to transport and local approval.
I think I heard the UK is the least proactive for on shore wind construction out of 29 countries next to the last which is Ukraine who have obvious problems.
WTF is going on ?
 
Grant Schapps said there is resistance to on shore wind turbines due to their size making them difficult to transport and local approval.
I think I heard the UK is the least proactive for on shore wind construction out of 29 countries next to the last which is Ukraine who have obvious problems.
WTF is going on ?
I'd rather see wind turbines than acres and acres of solar panels. My local council has passed plans to cover a local park/nature reserve that was originally a landfill site, it will supply some of the power to our local hospital when the sun shines. I expect a single turbine would produce the same or more power. Land hosting turbines wouldn't be as big a loss to agriculture as solar panels are.
 
Grant Schapps said there is resistance to on shore wind turbines due to their size making them difficult to transport and local approval.
I think I heard the UK is the least proactive for on shore wind construction out of 29 countries next to the last which is Ukraine who have obvious problems.
WTF is going on ?

Our overall wind electricity production is impressive, we have a smaller land footprint than most and a higher density of population.

Given we are an Island, offshore is the fastest way to hit our targets and for many the less intrusive.

https://windeurope.org/intelligence...021-statistics-and-the-outlook-for-2022-2026/

Far from being the worst, we're the best for new installations overall!

Just read point 2 of the findings;
 
Last edited:
Our overall wind electricity production is impressive, we have a smaller land footprint than most and a higher density of population.

Given e are an Island, offshore is the fastest way to hit our targets and for many the less intrusive.

https://windeurope.org/intelligence...021-statistics-and-the-outlook-for-2022-2026/

Far from being the worst, we're the best for new installations overall!

Just read point 2 of the findings;

The UK is a good investment right now. In 10 years you will be rocking it.
 
The UK is a good investment right now. In 10 years you will be rocking it.

Once the new small RR nuclear plants start getting put into place, we will never suffer an energy crunch like this again. Jim is dead serious about getting his one in first and earlier than the current time plan..

There is no single reason why this couldn't supply 50% of our growing Electricity demands by 2050.



Rolls-Royce in talks over first mini nuclear reactor for Ineos at Grangemouth

Alex Ralph
Monday November 28 2022, 12.01am, The Times
Markets
%2Fmethode%2Ftimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2Fa86a492c-6e6f-11ed-af31-6255df037b54.jpg

Rolls-Royce intends to develop mini nuclear reactors, which may look like this artist’s impression of Grangemouth, to help Britain’s net zero campaign

Rolls-Royce is in talks with Ineos to build a mini nuclear reactor to power the chemicals group’s Grangemouth refinery.

Rolls is heading a government-backed consortium to develop between 20 and 30 small modular nuclear reactors but is in need of customers to help to reduce the risk of the venture.

The FTSE 100 engineering company created the venture last year, which has received £280 million of investment from private firms, including the Qatar Investment Authority, and a £210 million government grant to support it through the safety approval process.


Business briefing:
In-depth analysis and comment on the latest financial and economic news from our award-winning Business teams.


It believes it can cut the cost of the reactors by building the parts in factories and assembling them on site.

The company shortlisted six sites in July for a factory that would build the proposed reactors, including the constituency of Rishi Sunak, in Richmond, North Yorkshire, and at Sunderland, Deeside in Wales, Ferrybridge in West Yorkshire and Carlisle.


The reactors initially will be on existing or decommissioned nuclear sites and will be designed to be able to generate 470 megawatts of electricity, equivalent to more than 150 onshore wind turbines and enough to power a million homes.
Ministers are finalising plans to support the project through a body called Great British Nuclear, which will be responsible for getting planning permission and undertaking the preparation work on the new sites.

Jim Ratcliffe owns the Ineos chemical works at Grangmouth, in Scotland

It forms part of the government’s strategy to decarbonise the electricity supply and to triple Britain’s nuclear generating capacity to 24GW by 2050, accounting for up to 25 per cent of projected electricity demand.
In addition to generating low-carbon electricity for the grid, Rolls plans for the reactors to be deployed to power energy-intensive industrial processes, including the production of hydrogen and synthetic fuels.



Rolls’ talks with Ineos, first reported by The Sunday Telegraph, are understood to be at an early stage. Ineos’s Grangemouth refinery in Scotland is a joint venture with PetroChina and refines crude oil and produces chemicals.
Ineos was approached for comment.
 
Can wind turbines occupy arable farm land ? Research has suggested the crops benefit from the air movement..If the land was purely for crop production a turbine could be a bonus. Solar panels will not allow crops and a nuclear plant won't either even though it will be a smaller area.
Is it assumed that the land that turbines occupy is not fit for anything else.
 
Can wind turbines occupy arable farm land ? Research has suggested the crops benefit from the air movement..If the land was purely for crop production a turbine could be a bonus. Solar panels will not allow crops and a nuclear plant won't either even though it will be a smaller area.
Is it assumed that the land that turbines occupy is not fit for anything else.
Not that I'm aware of, I don't see why the land around turbines can't still be grazed or used for crops, the turbine blades are well away from the ground.
 
Not that I'm aware of, I don't see why the land around turbines can't still be grazed or used for crops, the turbine blades are well away from the ground.

I got the impression the energy production was being measured by land area. Its fairly obvious turbines will be lower output per acre. But if crops are grown around them and the land remains productive farm wise, I don't quite get the output comparison.
 
Not that I'm aware of, I don't see why the land around turbines can't still be grazed or used for crops, the turbine blades are well away from the ground.

There is an issue with maximum output i.e. size _ closeness to ground/type of crops etc (some don't do well and yields go down in centrifugal wind sheer) and crops attract birds and birds basically get badly mangled (lots of them!) by wind turbines..Plus on land the output isn't as great and effective financially as they have to be smaller on land because of accumulated intense noise (density of turbines) aesthetics: and lots of other practical reasons like maintenance.

I have long ago invested in turbine and there are a lot of hidden costs/reasons for reduced financial behaviour over time.

The new vibrating turbines/poles promise to be far less problematic, but may still be some way off:

https://www.euronews.com/green/2022...rating-wind-turbine-is-producing-clean-energy
 
Last edited: