Authors - Cath Hassell and David Olivier:
(12-03-06) | The green electricity illusion |
An urban myth is doing the rounds in the UK at present, which is gaining more and more credence. It is said that specifying electric resistance space and water heating is more environmentally sustainable than specifying a gas condensing boiler. The argument is that if the occupier signs up to a renewable energy supplier then there will be zero CO2 emissions for the heating of the property in question. Cath Hassell and David Olivier disagree.
Electric space heating has been increasingly specified since the early 1990’s, mostly due to the cost savings in installation for the developer, and regardless of its on-costs for both the consumer (higher tariffs and less controllability than gas central heating) and the environment (almost double the carbon emissions per kWh delivered energy). In late 2002 we began to be aware of the first signs of this illusion of “green electricity” being the saviour of CO2 emissions from heating buildings and in 2003, in Tall Buildings and Sustainability," the following appeared: “In any building ‘green energy’ can be purchased leading to no or low emissions from electricity consumption which may favour electrical solutions rather than gas for heating and hot water” ...
|
Graham:
(15-03-06) | RE: The green electricity illusion |
The great green electricity con. Would you sign up with a food producer who promised to grow organically but couldn't guarantee that the actual food you received was organic?
As the authors mention, if everybody signed up they couldn't supply. Green electricity isn't like organic veg where surplus can be sold off at the end of the day at half price or composted. The green electricity is already being used by someone. All you're doing by signing up is getting a "feel better" effect and theoretically diverting the green electrons from another user to yourself. Better to save the "greenwash tax" and donate it to charity. Or buy a windmill.
|
Biff:
(19-03-06) | RE: The green electricity illusion |
Great article, Cath and Dave, I hope it gets a wide audience.
I think it's worth pointing out the the electricity generating AND supply company, Ecotricity, is in the unique position of re-investing profits into further wind turbine development. It currently supplies more electricity than it generates and so buys the extra from the, mostly unsustainable, generators but "...if everyone in the UK signed up..." with Ecotricity they would have the capital to rebuild our energy supply infrastucture. Dale Vince might be rather surprised.
There has been much discussion of such topics on The Oil Drum Uk at
http://uk.theoildrum.com/
|
Geoff.:
(27-03-06) | RE: The green electricity illusion |
Cath, Dave
Second to last paragraph in the printed article, you refer to "seasonally-stored solar heat" in Germany and Sweden.
Could you provide any references to these (on the web)?
Cheers.
Geoff.
|
Paul in Montreal:
(10-04-06) | RE: The green electricity illusion |
The only effective seasonally stored solar heat that I'm aware of is that which is stored in the ground and which can be accessed using a ground source heat pump. Approximately 50% of the sun's radiation ends up being stored in the ground. A GSHP (assuming reasonable electrical rates to run the compressor) can use this energy and provide cheap and effective heating *and* cooling. Such systems are common in many places - I live in Montreal and, despite our fearsome winters, a GSHP provides 97.5% of my annual heat load and 100% of the cooling requirements. Since we have low electrical rates and generation which is >95% hydroelectric, it is a very cost effective and essential zero CO2 emitting solution.
Paul.
|
Nick:
(02-05-06) | RE: The green electricity illusion |
In working out the Gas v Electricity CO2 emmissions did you include the entire Gas supply infrastructure, vehicle emmissions,traffic jams from holes in the road etc,etc. It could make electricity seem slightly less disfavourable.What about deaths from CO poisoning,gas leaks? Surely security of supply is paramount even at the risk of slightly higher CO2 emmissions? (see your third from last para) Are you sleeping well at night at the thought of where the gas is to come from? I think we should forget gas and explore every other alternative.
|
