VolUME 26 No. 1 – MARCH 2008
OFFICIAL JOURNAL
OF THE AUSTRALIAN
INSTITUTE OF ENERGY
Energy and Water
PLUS:
Biogas
Coal
Hydrogen
Wind
www.aie.org.au
ISSN 1445-2227
(International Standard Serial Number allocated
by the National Library of Australia)
THE AUSTRALIAN
INSTITUTE OF ENERGY
Energy
News
Contents
Journal Correspondence
Joy Claridge
PO Box 298
Brighton, VIC 3186
email: [email protected]
Advertising
Members (and non-members) may place
advertisements in EnergyNews on behalf
of themselves or their organisations. If you
wish to use this opportunity contact:
Joy Claridge
PO Box 298
Brighton, VIC 3186
email: [email protected]
Advertisements can include products,
services, consulting, and positions vacant
and required.
Discounts are available for members and for
all advertisements repeated in two or more
issues.
Subscription Information
EnergyNews is published by The Australian
Institute of Energy and is provided to
all members as part of the membership
subscription. Non‑members may obtain
copies of this journal by contacting either the
Secretariat or the Editor.
Contributions Welcome
Articles on energy matters, letters to
the editor, personal notes and photographs
of those involved in the energy sector are
most welcome.
President’s Message
2
AIE in Newcastle
3
Coal Challenges
5
Biogas Energy
6
California’s Challenge
7
Victoria’s Energy Future
8
Special Feature
Energy and Water
Published By
The Australian Institute of Energy
ABN 95 001 509 173
Registered Office
78 Masonite Road, Tomago, NSW 2322
Postal Address
PO Box 193
Surrey Hills VIC 3127
Telephone Toll Free: 1800 629 945
Facsimile: (03) 9898 0249
email: [email protected]
Disclaimer
Although publication of articles
submitted is at the sole and absolute
discretion of the Australian Institute of
Energy, statements made in this journal
do not necessarily reflect the views of
the Institute.
Articles
ABARE Forecasts
19
BMW Hydrogen 7
20
Web Address
http://www.aie.org.au
Print Post Approved No. PP 32604/00001
10
Book Review
Lights Out
22
Letter to the Editor
23
24
Membership Matters
Cover illustrations (left to right):
Courtesy PWP Ltd, Carnegie
Corporation Ltd and Finsbury Ltd
EnergyNews
— Volume 26
— No.
Volume
1 March
26 No.
2008
1 March 2008
EnergyNews
President’s Message
Interesting times
Murray Meaton, President,
Australian Institute of Energy
The saying — May you live in interesting
times — is intended to be ironical
in that it is a curse to be faced with
so many choices. After 16 years of
nearly continuous economic growth,
we Australians can rightly say we
have never had it so good. However,
with that prosperity has come very
high energy consumption and we
now face the challenge of reducing
this consumption or making it less
environmentally damaging — we
probably need to do both.
The incoming Labor Government has
set itself an ambitious target to cut
greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by
2050. This will involve research and
development, business facilitation
and investment in renewable energy
sources. Cleaner energy from coal
is a foundation objective along with
an emissions trading scheme. Both
will take substantial effort to develop
and careful commercialisation if the
goal is to be achieved. Meeting the
targets will necessitate development
of a broad range of policy options and
examination of all energy sources, uses
and impacts.
The Australian Institute of Energy has
a role to play and we look forward
to participating. The national Board
is encouraging Institute branches to
conduct seminars and workshops that
address the technology and market
options for increased energy efficiency
and reduced environmental impact.
Introducing PAMS
To improve services to AIE Members
and meet our increasingly demanding
corporate governance and regulatory
obligations, the Institute has contracted
our secretariat, accounting, website
and membership management tasks to
Professional Association Management
Services (PAMS). From 1 March 2008,
AIE Secretariat contact details will
change to:
The Australian Institute of Energy
PO Box 193
Surrey Hills VIC 3127
Ph: Freecall 1800 629 945 (unchanged)
Fax: (03) 9898 0249
email: [email protected] (unchanged)
website: www.aie.org.au (unchanged)
A smooth transition of ser vices
is expected and members should
progressively see added benefits such
as an improved website and monthly
email notice, and the facility to update
membership information and pay
annual subscriptions online. Some
AIE branches may be using PAMS
for various services. For example,
in January 2008, Melbourne Branch
introduced online event registration
and secure credit card payment for
branch events, and the feedback has
been overwhelmingly positive.
Murray Meaton
President, AIE
Special Features 2008
EnergyNews is pleased to present Energy & Water in the special feature in this issue, and we hope you enjoy the
diverse and interesting articles. If you are keen to contribute to June 2008 issue’s topic — Developments in Oil &
Gas — advise the editor of your intention to submit material by 25 April 2008, and send copy by 16 May 2008.
The topic for the special feature in September 2008 issue of EnergyNews will be Hydrogen, and all material for
this special feature will be sourced from presentations to the World Hydrogen Energy Conference, WHEC 2008,
hosted by the Australian Institute of Energy in Brisbane on 15–19 June 2008.
In December 2008 issue, it will be Future Liquid Fuels, covering alternatives to petroleum fuels including, but not
limited to, biofuels, synfuels, and coal/gas to oil. So, let the editor know of your intention to submit material by
24 October 2008, and send copy to editor for publication by 14 November 2008.
Suggestions for topics in 2009 welcome, and please include contact details of expert contributors if known.
Contact details:Joy Claridge
[email protected]
(03) 9596 3608
0402 078 071
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2007
AIE in Newcastle
The AIE Board held its final meeting for 2007 and the Institute held its national
2007 AGM at the CSIRO Energy Centre in Newcastle on 27 November 2007.
Board members and Newcastle branch members enjoyed a tour of the facility,
including the wind turbines, photovoltaic system and cogeneration plant.
It has taken nearly 20 years to bring this world-beating
technology to the market. Much of that time has gone
into basic research, mainly in the areas of optimising blade
aerodynamics for power, starting performance, and noise.
Ideal blades, however, are complex 3-dimensional shapes
and raise many structural and fatigue issues that we have
only recently solved.1
The other main innovation is in the controller. We are
working closely with Zener Electric in Sydney to adapt their
motor speed control technology for use as wind turbine
controllers. Only a few standard extra components are
required, and the result is a very cheap controller that is also
an inverter. In other words, the purchaser of our turbine does
not have to spend an extra A$3,000–4,000 on an inverter.
The grid-connected form of the turbine is actually cheaper
than the battery-charging one.
AIE members on tour at CSIRO Energy Centre
After the tour, David Wood, from the School of Engineering,
The University of Newcastle, and Aerogenesis Australia,
presented on wind energy research in Newcastle. A summary
of his presentation follows.
The commercialisation strategy combines leading-edge
technology (pun intended) with the maximum use of
standard, mass-produced components. We believe this will
transform the manufacture of small wind turbines from the
present paradigm of small volume and high cost to massproduced cheaper units. The 5 kW turbine will enter the
market at around A$20,000 which is significantly cheaper
Taking newcastle’s wind energy
research to the world
Research and development of small wind turbines began at
Newcastle University in the mid 1980s. In 1992 we installed
our first 5 kW test turbine at Waratah, next to the university.
This was followed in 1997 by another 5 kW turbine at the
much windier site at Fort Scratchley at the entrance to
Newcastle Harbour. Since 2001 we have had a 500 W turbine
running on the top of the engineering building on campus
and plan to install an advanced Aerogenesis 5 kW turbine
on campus by mid 2008.
Commercialisation of the technology began with Energy
Australia in 1997, but, unfortunately, their ‘Power On’
turbine project did not proceed. After deciding that we could
not rely on others to take us to market, Aerogenesis was
started in 2004 to commercialise the (then) latest version
of the 5 kW turbine whose blade and controller design had
been patented. The Australian Greenhouse Office is now
supporting the installation of five demonstration turbines
in China and Australia (including the one on campus) and
commercial production will follow soon.
Aerogenesis 5 kW demonstration turbine
1 This work was described in a paper delivered at the Solar 07
conference in Alice Springs, a copy of which can be obtained
by emailing [email protected]
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
than any competitor. We anticipate eventually reducing the
price to around A$15,000 when production is fully underway.
The 5 kW turbine will produce about 25 kWh per day at a
good (windy) site.
Because of their high cost, small turbines have been used
traditionally for battery charging. The much lower cost of
our technology allows us to explore a new market niche
— grid-connected turbines in areas where large turbines
are unsuitable. Typical sites include railway and freeway
corridors, industrial estates, parking areas, schools and
universities. Combining the income from electricity sales
and carbon credits with the ‘image revenue’ from advertising
that associates the sponsor with this green energy makes the
turbine a very attractive investment. In countries that have
higher base electricity prices, such as most of Europe, the
turbine will return its investment in a few years. Aerogenesis
is currently negotiating a major export project with a leading
energy supplier in the United Kingdom.
We are also working on other projects. Aerogenesis and
university staff are voluntarily supporting a project in
Nepal to develop an indigenous small turbine for (very)
remote power production. The next Aerogenesis turbine
will probably be a 30 kW unit as this is the largest rating
that can be grid-connected without requiring a generator’s
licence. The controller technology becomes relatively
cheaper with increasing power, so the 30 kW will be even
more cost-effective than the 5 kW; but may well have a more
limited market.
Research and development continues. A web-based
monitoring and data gathering system will allow predictive
maintenance and performance assessment. Our optimisation
work is being extended to the tower design which
becomes more critical as size increases. There are two
main developments in controller strategies. The first is in
maximum power point tracking (MPPT), ie ensuring that the
turbine extracts the maximum power from the wind. MPPT
is used in many turbines, but current strategies are based
on steady turbine performance which is not necessarily the
optimum strategy in a continually varying wind. This issue
is particularly important for small turbines as their blade
inertia is relatively much smaller than for large turbines.
Secondly, we are exploring the power producing capacity of
the turbine in high wind. Turbine power rating is nominal,
and high power occurs when there is plenty of cooling air
for the generator; so it may well be possible to extract, say,
7 kW from a 5 kW turbine at wind speeds greater than the
rated speed. These high winds may not occur very often but
the disproportionate power they produce can significantly
increase the average power output.
Testing a wooden blade for the Nepal project
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Coal
Challenges facing the Australian coal industry
Based on a presentation to Canberra Branch by Burt Beasley, Director
Technology and Innovation, Australian Coal Association, on 19 December 2007.
Coal is a dominant force in the Australian economy, as an export
product and source of electrical power. In terms of total world
coal reserves, Australia has the 4th largest black coal resource
base (approximately 75 billion tonnes of demonstrated black
coal) and the 2nd largest brown coal reserves. Coal is Australia’s
largest merchandise export, worth A$24.2 billion in 2005–06,
and Australia is the world’s largest coal exporter, accounting for
around 30% of world coal trade. The Australian coal industry is
a major regional employer with around 30,000 workers directly
employed at coal mines. Many more jobs are directly or indirectly
associated with the industry. Coal accounts for around 80%
of electricity generation in Australia, and this is the basis for
Australia’s comparative advantage in power, supporting energyintensive industries such as aluminium, steel and cement.
Despite these facts, Australia accounts for only 6% of world coal
production. Australia’s use of coal accounts for 0.4% of global
greenhouse gas emissions, and Australia’s export coal accounts
for a further 1.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions; in total
less than 2%. If Australia withdrew from the world coal market
there may be some substitution out of coal, but it is far more
likely that the gap left in the market would be filled by supplies
from other countries, particularly Indonesia and China. The
impact on global greenhouse gas emissions would be minimal,
not only because other countries would ramp up supply but
also because Australian coals are of a very high quality, and
substitution with coal from countries such as China and India,
which have a very high ash content, may actually have a negative
greenhouse impact.
Coal21
Initiated by the Australian coal industry, the COAL21 Program
is aimed at realising the potential of advanced technologies to
reduce or eliminate greenhouse gas emissions associated with
the use of coal. COAL21 is a collaborative partnership between
the Australian and state governments, the coal and electricity
generation industries, the research community and unions.
to stop the CO2 entering the atmosphere. This is either through
postcombustion capture or oxy-fuel combustion.
The pathway at the bottom is based on gasification technology,
which converts the carbon and hydrogen in coal into CO2 and
clean burning hydrogen gas.
The CO2 that is captured using any of these technologies is
compressed into a liquid state. Under normal pressure, if you
cool CO2 it will go straight from a gaseous state to the familiar
solid state — dry ice. However, under higher pressures CO2
becomes a ‘supercritical’ liquid. This liquid CO2 can then be
injected deep underground into porous rock structures. The
pressures at these depths (over 600–800 metres) maintain the
CO2 in a liquid state and it is permanently trapped. Australia
has undertaken world-leading research into identifying suitable
geological structures. The projects listed on the right hand side
are those that are already underway or have been proposed to
investigate these processes further. The first carbon storage
pilot project — the Otway project — will commence injection
of CO2 in 2008.
Funded by the world’s first voluntary production-based levy
on black coal producers, the COAL21 Fund is spending more
than A$1 billion over 10 years in support of technologies in
the demonstration phase, with the objective of significantly
reducing the greenhouse gas emissions from coal.
The priority technologies are carbon capture (postcombustion
capture through various processes, oxy-fuel combustion,
precombustion capture via gasification) and carbon storage
(in depleting oil and gas reservoirs, in saline water saturated
reservoir rocks (aquifers), and in and below coal seams).
There are two main pathways for clean coal technology. The
following slide shows the work being done through some of the
pilot programs and demonstration projects to develop these
technologies in Australia.
The pathway at the top is based on applying carbon capture and
storage technology to conventional coal combustion technology,
For further information, see www.coal21.com.au or
www.australiancoal.com.au, or email burt.beasley@
australiancoal.com.au
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Biogas
An untapped source of energy
Presentation to Melbourne Branch by Torsten Fischer, Managing Director,
Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH, 23 June 2007.
Torsten Fischer is one of the world’s leading experts on the
application and utilisation of biogas technology. Based in
Göttingen in Germany, in the past 15 years, Krieg & Fischer
Ingenieure has built around 120 biogas plants in Germany, other
European countries, the United States, Canada and Japan.
We usually associate biogas with the recovery of gaseous
energy from municipal waste water treatment plants, such as
Werribee and Carrum. Using a number of interesting plant
photographs, Torsten Fischer showed that biogas can be made
from a multitude of waste materials, including potato peel,
apple residue, sugar beet residue, kitchen waste, fats and grease,
agricultural waste, and waste from cattle feed lots, pig farms,
rendering plants, canneries and bioethanol plants. Fats (eg old
chip fat) deliver the highest yields, whereas manure and
kitchen waste among the lowest.
Figure 2: Schematic of biogas power plant
The biogas is rich in methane and is therefore most suitable as
a fuel for a gas engine-driven power generation plant. Power
output varies from several hundred kW to upwards of 8 MW.
Mr Fischer described how biogas power generation had grown
over the past 15 or so years. In Germany, where there are now
more than 3,000 biogas power plants in operation and the
generation of biogas power exceeds wind power, the industry
is supported by an attractive guaranteed electricity buyback
price (see Figure 3).
Figure 1: Biogas plant in Werlte (90,000 m³ manure & 20,000
m³ fats per annum) Source: Krieg & Fischer Ingenieure GmbH
The treatment of these materials does vary, but typically it
follows a series of logical process steps (see Figure 2):
1. Feedstock material is collected and stored.
2.Pretreatment, which will vary with the nature of the feed, but
can involve grinding, sieving, homogenisation and removal
of foreign objects.
3.The prepared feed is then semi-continuously added to a
large fermenter or digester and blended into the reacting
‘soup’ using a side- or top-entry stirrer. Bacterial action
anaerobically breaks down the substrate in essentially four
sequential phases – hydrolysis, acidification, acetogenic
transfer, then methanogenic formation of methane. External
heating may be applied to keep the reactor temperature at
an acceptable level.
4.Biogas is released and collected for further use — typically
in a gas engine for the generation of electric power.
5. Nondigestible residual material is then removed.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Figure 3: Payment for electricity from biogas in various countries
The industry developed partly in response to a general public
dislike of nuclear power and government bans on the use of raw
manure and waste food. The need for better management of the
environment accelerated the level of interest. Instead of putting
farm waste back on the fields where it would biodegrade and
release significant quantities of methane into the atmosphere
(methane is a far more intense greenhouse gas than CO2), the
government legislated for more effective control and use of these
wastes. Here in Australia, site location, access to the grid and
government support could make this untapped biogas source of
energy a serious option for renewable energy power generation.
For further information, see www.KriegFischer.de
Summary prepared by Chris Hamilton, Manager Select,
WorleyParsons Services Pty Ltd
California’s challenge
Having your cake and eating it too
Presentation by Perry Sioshansi, President, Menlo Energy Economics*,
California, to AIE Perth Branch on 21 November 2007.
Can California have adequate energy while meeting stringent
emission restrictions?
California’s green Republican governor, with the support of
the Democratic-controlled Legislature and the consent of the
California Public Utility Commission (CPUC), has passed
a number of laws collectively aimed at reducing that state’s
greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. How will
California meet this goal? How much will it cost? Will it be
worth the effort? What might the implications be for the
United States as a whole or, even, globally? Most importantly,
should resource-rich Australia take notice? Perry Sioshansi
offered a synopsis of how California, the 6th largest economy
in the world, is trying to meet its self-imposed targets
without scuttling its vibrant economy.
Amid great fanfare in 2006, California passed an ambitious
law to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 level
by 2020. Meeting the goal of the Assembly Bill 32 (AB32)
requires a 25% reduction in emissions compared to a
business-as-usual scenario while the state’s population is
expected to rise by 41% by 2020. At the time of bill’s passage,
there were a few educated guesses on how much it might cost
but the politicians were focused on the positive aspects of
the law such as the multi billion dollar development of green
and clean technologies. Since then, a few attempts have been
made to come up with rough cost estimates for meeting the
law. This is not easy, partly because AB32 is largely mute on
the crucial details on how the target is to be met and how
the burden shall be spread among various sectors of the
economy – principally the transportation, power generation,
and a handful of other major industries.
How much will it cost? One early study conducted by the
Electric Power Research Institute came up with a US$100–
511 billion price tag through 2050 or roughly 0.2–1.2% of
state GDP. The wide range reflects the uncertainties in how
AB32 may be implemented. Another unknown is whether
other western states will join California in similar efforts and/
or whether national or international greenhouse gas limits
will be introduced during the interim years. If there is any
consensus among the economists looking into this, it is that
the ultimate cost will critically depend on implementation
details — principally burden allocation among various
sectors. Simply stated, the costs will be less if the target is
to be met through a broadly-based scheme such as a capand-trade system or a broad, technology-neutral carbon
tax. It will cost more if multiple uncoordinated sector and
fuel-specific targets are established and enforced through
separate command-and-control mechanisms, as appears
likely. Regulators and policy makers favor the latter since they
are more familiar with such schemes and because there is less
transparency on the ultimate costs. Studies done elsewhere
reach similar conclusions. Targets would be easier to meet if
the entire western region of the United States, or the entire
country, were to follow a similar path.
The CPUC, the California Energy Commission (CEC) and
California Independent System Operator (CAISO) have
been holding quarterly meetings to examine the options.
Speaking during their latest meeting in mid-December
2007, Julie Fitch, Director of Strategic Planning with
CPUC, ventured that meeting the requirements of AB32
“may call for utilities to increase electricity and natural gas
rates by about 30% on average by 2020.” That’s admittedly
a rough guess; but indicative of the cost burden that may
be required, and this does not account for costs on other
sectors of the economy, notably transportation and heavy
industry — of the latter there is relatively little in California.
Ms Fitch’s rough estimate is based on a preliminary CPUC
analysis, which indicates that California’s energy sector
can meet the AB32 target by ramping up the state’s energy
efficiency efforts to ‘unprecedented’ levels and by boosting
the renewable portfolio standard (RPS) to 33% by 2020,
as already envisioned through an Executive Order issued
by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Due to potential
for ‘leakage’, other western states would also have to boost
their own RPS and energy efficiency efforts for California’s
greenhouse gas reduction targets to be met. Fitch said that
according to ‘very preliminary’ CPUC estimates, roughly
one-third of the utility rate increases could come from
energy efficiency costs with the balance from increased RPS.
While the numbers are not precise, Fitch said she wanted to
convey the magnitude of potential rate increases associated
with meeting AB32. We can expect to hear more on this in
the years to come.
* Menlo Energy Economics is a energy sector consulting firm based in San Francisco.
Perry is the editor and publisher of EEnergy Informer, a monthly newsletter with wide
international circulation. His most recent book, Competitive Electricity Markets:
Design, Implementation, Performance, has just been published.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Victoria’s Energy Future
Roadmap to Victoria’s Energy Future
— a 2020 Vision
Presentation by the Hon Peter Batchelor MP, Victorian Minister
for Energy & Resources, to AIE Melbourne Branch on 8 November 2007.
I believe that we are
approaching a period
of significant change
within the energy
sector. The Victorian
Government’s current
energy policy is to ensure
energy is affordable,
efficient and secure;
supplies are delivered
reliably and safely; and
energy production and
use becomes more
sustainable and produces
less greenhouse gases. This last point recognises that climate
change is the biggest environmental challenge we face,
and that tackling it will require significant reductions in
greenhouse gas emissions.
The year 2020
Let’s just take a moment to think about energy projections
in the year 2020. According to both Victorian Government
data and the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource
Economics (ABARE),
● Victorian economic growth will average a healthy 2.7%
per annum, noting that economic activity is a key driver
of energy consumption;
● Victoria’s population will be just under 6 million;
● the market penetration of air-conditioners in Victoria will
rise from about 50% to around 70%;
● further, there will be a shift from evaporative to
refrigerative models of air-conditioning which use more
energy;
● without the intervention of government initiatives,
Victoria’s energy consumption could rise by approximately
16%; and
● even more worrying, our peak energy use could rise by
over 20%.
Early action is necessary
The Brumby Government knows that early action to address
climate change is necessary to secure our energy future. The
Stern review, headed by Nicholas Stern, a former head of the
UK Treasury and World Bank economist, has confirmed that
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
the earlier action is taken to combat climate change, the less
expensive it will be. The Brumby Government has already
taken significant steps to reduce Victoria’s ‘carbon footprint’.
The main way that we have done this is to advocate for an
emissions trading regime as the most cost-effective way to
cut greenhouse emissions. Imposing a cost on carbon will
encourage investment in alternative and cleaner energies
and technologies like carbon capture and storage. Since
2004, we have worked with the other states and territories to
develop a preferred model for a national emissions trading
scheme (ETS).
We are of the view that emissions trading should be
complemented by a range of other greenhouse gas abatement
measures, including energy efficiency, support for innovation
in energy technology and the continued development of the
renewable energy sector.
Energy efficiency
We recognise that reducing energy use is the quickest and
cheapest way of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the
short term. Energy efficiency offers both environmental
and economic benefits. For example, independent analysis
has found that if Victoria reduces its energy use by 1% each
year, Gross State Product would increase by $360 million
and greenhouse emissions would be cut by 6.2 million
tonnes. However, there are a number of market barriers to
energy efficiency measures, including the poor availability
of information, split incentives for tenants and landlords,
behavioural inertia, and uncertainty about returns from
investment in energy efficiency initiatives. That is why we
have introduced new energy efficiency initiatives.
1. The Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) scheme,
introduced into Parliament in early November 2007, will
provide an incentive for cost-effective energy-efficient
activities to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse
emissions from the residential sector.
2. $14 million is being invested over the next four years to
introduce a rebate program for retrofitting or replacing
old appliances with energy-efficient ones.
3. $2 million is being invested to expand the Energy Task
Force program, to retrofit public housing estates with
energy efficiency improvements.
4. Sustainability standards for Victorian homes and
buildings are being improved by establishing, for example,
minimum standards for heating and cooling appliances
in new homes.
5. Feed-in tariff provisions will be strengthened to ensure
that households (and small businesses) that feed renewable
energy back into the electricity grid are paid a fair price.
6. From 2008 all houses sold in Victoria will be required
to be fitted with water saving devices, such as low-flow
showerheads.
7. The successful ‘Black Balloon’ campaign will be extended
to encourage energy conservation.
Support for innovation
Reducing energy demand is one way we are tackling the
climate challenge.
But what about the use of brown coal for power generation?
Given that brown coal is likely to remain the most abundant
and low-cost primary energy source available to Victoria for
some time, how can we continue to use our most abundant
resource and enjoy the wealth it offers in a responsible
and sustainable way? Deep cuts, and near-zero emissions
from the Latrobe Valley can only be achieved through the
development of technology. That is why we are investing
around $180 million under the Energy Technology
Innovation Strategy (ETIS) for research, development,
demonstration and commercialisation for lower-emission
technologies. These include cleaner brown coal technologies
and renewable energy projects. For example there are
opportunities to improve the greenhouse efficiency of our
existing power stations and to trial new technologies too. That
is why we are contributing $30 million for the development
of a demonstration project at Hazelwood Power Station to
retrofit brown coal drying technology. We have contributed
$6 million to the CO2CRC for a carbon dioxide storage trial
in the Otway basin, and we are funding $50 million for the
construction of a ‘clean coal’ demonstration power station
based on coal drying and gasification technology. Earlier this
year we released an issues paper Towards near-zero emissions
from Latrobe Valley Brown Coal. The response from industry
and the community to this paper has been tremendous. We
are currently developing the policy framework that will allow
us to deliver on this vision.
Support for renewable energy
We know that there is no ‘silver bullet’ that will tackle climate
change. Instead, there is a suite of measures that will allow
us to tackle the challenge on a number of fronts. That is
why when the Commonwealth Government decided not
to increase its Mandatory Renewable Energy Targets, the
Victorian Government stepped into the breach and created
the Victorian Renewable Energy Target (VRET) scheme
which commenced on 1 January 2007. VRET sets a target
of 10% of Victoria’s electricity consumption to be met from
renewable sources by 2016. Since the announcement of
the VRET scheme more than 1,000 MW of wind energy
projects, valued at over $2 billion, have been confirmed. We
have contributed $50 million to support the development of
one of the world’s largest solar power stations, to be built
in north-west Victoria. We have established an $8 million
Renewable Energy Support Fund to support renewable
energy technology, and we are putting our money where
our mouth is by purchasing 10% of the government’s own
energy in the form of Green Power, with a plan to increase
this to 25% by 2010. We are also installing solar panels on
500 school and community buildings.
Smart meters
We are working towards the wide-scale accelerated rollout
of smart metering across Victoria. This will give consumers
better information about their energy use, and a greater range
of options to improve their energy efficiency. Smart metering
systems that enable two-way communication will see the
deployment of new technology capable of communicating
with displays and other in-home devices, giving customers
access to better energy information and control. We believe
that energy consumption information used in conjunction
with cost-reflective or dynamic pricing will provide an
incentive for consumers to shift their energy demand away
from peak times and reduce their bills. For example, sensors
on high-power items such as air-conditioners, pool pumps
and slab heating could communicate with the smart meterrelated technologies to adjust their operation to suit certain
pricing schedules and to save consumers money. As an
aside, today we have taken another step towards removing
regulation from energy pricing here in Victoria. Due to
the maturing of the competitive Victorian energy retail
market, small businesses can get better value for money on
their energy bills. The State Government will no longer set
a standard price for electricity and gas for small business
customers from January 2008. We are genuinely moving to
more cost-reflective pricing for energy here in Victoria.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Brumby Government is working to provide
a clear policy setting, the regulatory framework and the right
incentives to encourage the right kind of investment, which
will carry Victoria into the future. As I have outlined, we
are tackling the climate change challenge in a number of
ways. We are working with industry to deliver practical
projects and effective scientific research to improve the
environmental performance of our energy sector, including
significant investment in renewable energy and innovation.
We are leading the way in national reforms to provide greater
benefits for investors and consumers including support for
a national emissions trading scheme, which will create the
signal for the next wave of investment in Victorian energy
infrastructure.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Special Feature
Energy and Water: An electric issue
This special feature could just as easily been called ‘Electricity and Water’,
because some of the major issues around the relationship between energy
and water derive from the use of scarce water in electricity production
and the electric energy-intensity of water production.
This special feature starts with an overview from Debborah
Marsh, who is completing her PhD at the University of
Technology Sydney, and Associate Professor Deepak
Sharma. Ms Marsh’s thesis examines the links between
energy and water policies and investigates the implications
of the links for the Australian economy. In her article, she
identifies some of the important links between electricity and
water; examines how the links are currently impacting the
electricity industry, and suggests ways to improve current
understanding, in order to develop a more adaptable and
resilient industry. Among these links are the high energy
intensity of desalination and the high water intensity of
electric power generation.
Following this introduction, Associate Professor Sandra
Kentish and Professor Stephen Gray deliver a more technical
paper around the work of the Advanced Membrane
Technologies for Water Treatment Research Cluster,
which is working towards solutions that decrease the
use of energy to provide sustainable and economic water
solutions by developing membrane research capacity and
new technologies. This is followed by look at the dry cooling
tower technology of CS Energy’s recently commissioned
Kogan Creek Power Station. The complex relationship
between water and energy in Victoria’s brown coal power
industry is reviewed by Dr David Allardice; and Itron’s Paul
Nelson discusses meter data collection trends in both the
water and energy sectors.
In the final article — Marine Power: Waves, tides & currents
— Andrew Taylor of AMOG Consulting takes us offshore
to reveal the energy secrets of the ocean.
EN
The Links between Energy and Water
By Debborah Marsh (PhD student), Institute for Water and Environmental Resources
Management, and Deepak Sharma, Associate Professor and coordinator of the Energy Planning
and Policy Program, Faculty of Engineering, University of Technology Sydney
Energy and water are fundamental to our economic and
social wellbeing. Both industries have fulfilled important
roles in Australia’s past, enabling progress in rural and urban
Australia. Now, energy and water issues are being discussed
at all levels of government and within the community.
Central to these discussions are microeconomic reforms
being implemented by state and national governments.
These reforms have, over the past decade or so, introduced
significant changes to the structure, ownership and
regulation of both industries. In terms of structure,
previously vertically-integrated utilities were functionally
unbundled into wholesale, network and retail segments.
Ownership shifted towards the private sector, as the
competitive wholesale and retail segments were opened to
competition. Further, new regulatory arrangements covered
price setting and service delivery and enabled third party
access to the monopoly segments. Concomitant to the
reform debate in recent years is scientific consensus on
climate change. Climate scientists forecast increased weather
variability, such as extreme droughts and floods, as a result of
the warming of the earth’s atmosphere. For a country already
afflicted by drought and flooding rains, such forecasts do not
bode well. Emerging from these discourses is an awareness of
how energy and water are inextricably linked. Recent policy
10
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
reforms, however, have appeared to ignore the constraints
imposed by the nexus, with unintended consequences.
Links between electricity and water?
Upstream links
‘Upstream’ primarily refers to wholesale electricity generation
and bulk water supply. It may also refer to coal dewatering
and subsequent water reuse.
Electricity generation is highly dependent on water for steam
production and cooling, or in the case of hydropower, kinetic
energy. Water intensities vary significantly for different
generation technologies. This is evident in the results of our
modelling work (see Table 1).
Hydropower used significantly more water compared to
other technologies, however, this water is returned to the
environment for downstream users. Of the remaining
technologies, coal-fired consumed the greatest amount of
water, followed by combined cycle gas turbine. Cogeneration
and gas turbine consumed the least. In the case of
cogeneration, water was sourced on site from coal mines,
which reduced reliance on mains water.
Table 1: Water intensities for electricity
generation technologies in NSW (2000–01)
Selected generation
technologies
Downstream links
kL/MWh
generated
Coal
1.70
Combined cycle gas turbine
0.99
Gas turbine (oil)
0.01
Cogeneration
0.01
Hydro
2217.07
Renewables
0.30
Energy sources such as biomass, hydrogen and nuclear
are viewed by proponents as viable alternatives that would
reduce the electricity industry’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Uptake of these technologies, however, may result in water
trade-offs. Biomass, for example, requires water for irrigation
and would compete with food crops for water during dry
periods. Hydrogen may be produced by reforming fossil fuels
or electrolysing water. The latter method does not generate
fossil fuels directly, but would require reliable sources of
water. Nuclear power is considered by proponents as a ‘green’
alternative to coal, yet it consumes between 30–50% more
water than a coal-fired power station (EPRI 2002).
In the water industry, indirect potable reuse (IPR) and
seawater desalination are alternative bulk water supply
options. IPR refers to highly-treated effluent that is
introduced into drinking water catchments, where it is diluted
with surface water prior to being retreated for potable use.
Both IPR and desalination require high levels of treatment
that typically includes membrane filtration and reverse
osmosis. For example, based on best available technology
that incorporates energy recovery, seawater desalination
consumes approximately 4 kWh per cubic meter of water
produced. Table 2 compares the electricity intensities of
desalination and IPR with other water treatment processes.
Table 2: Electricity intensities
for water treatment processes
Water treatment process
kWh/kL
produced
Conventional surface water treatment
0.4 – 0.6
Brackish water desalination
0.7 – 1.2
Reclamation of municipal wastewater (eg IPR)
0.8 – 1.0
Seawater desalination
3.0 – 5.0
(Source: Voutchkov 2005)
Transportation links
Transportation links comprise the use of electricity to
move water, which is heavy and bulky. These links include
groundwater extraction, bulk surface water transfers, retail
water distribution and wastewater collection. It is estimated
that water transportation consumes up to 7% of world energy
production (James, Campbell & Godlove 2002).
Downstream links refer to electricity for water and
wastewater treatment, electricity recovery in the water
industry and water and electricity use by consumers.
Water and wastewater treatment processes rely heavily on
electricity. Disruption to electricity supply would have severe
public health ramifications for the water industry. As a result
of the Californian Energy Crisis in 2001, water utilities in the
Unites States explored options to safeguard supply, including
the installation of renewable technologies. Elsewhere, water
utilities are generating electricity from within their systems.
Sydney Water, for example, is expanding the use of biogas
from its sewage treatment plants and will soon generate
hydropower from wastewater flows.
Demand management programs are being implemented
across Australia in both the water and electricity industries.
These programs should slow the growth in demand, with
flow-on effects for both industries due to the embedded
electricity in water and embedded water in electricity. Indeed,
a recent study in the United States concluded that “end use
constitutes the largest component of energy embedded in
the urban water cycle” (Cohen, Nelson & Wolff 2004).
Impact on the electricity industry
The potential impact of the nexus between the electricity
and water industries is significant, particularly in the context
of reform. Market mechanisms have already resulted in
alarming trade-offs, because there has been no integration
of energy and water policies. These trade-offs include:
reduction of electricity generation due to water shortages;
low electricity prices stimulating trade with little regard to
regional water shortages; and trade-offs between generators,
irrigators and the environment (in terms of emissions and
water for river health).
In 2007, Snowy Hydro reduced water releases from its
dams to downstream irrigators along the Murray and
Murrumbidgee Rivers due to water shortages. The company
maintained that it acted in accordance with its licence.
Industry observers, however, suggested the company was
storing the scarce water to produce power during peak
summer demand, when electricity prices are highest in
the NEM (National Electricity Market). The trade-off is
further exacerbated by Snowy River’s allocation of water for
environmental flows. In 2000, it was agreed to return 21%
of average natural flow to the Snowy River due to its poor
environmental state, which represents 150 GWh of foregone
electricity for Snowy Hydro.
Water shortages have impacted generators elsewhere. In
NSW smaller hydropower plants have reduced generation
output (S. Gough, pers com). In Victoria, similar reductions
in hydropower output have forced the use of more expensive
and more greenhouse-gas intensive generation options to
meet demand, reportedly pushing up the price of electricity
in the wholesale market by more than 80% in peak times
(Gordon & Kleinman 2007).
In Queensland, cheap electricity is being exported from
Swanbank and Tarong Power Stations to NSW via the
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
11
NEM. Both power stations are sourcing cooling water from
Brisbane’s main drinking water supply, Wivenhoe Dam,
despite the imposition of water restrictions in the region, and
despite sufficient capacity in NSW to meet its own demand. It
was reported that Swanbank and Tarong Power Stations cut
back production by 20% and 70% respectively due to water
restrictions, at a cost of approximately $1 million a day for
the Queensland Government (Ludlow & Wisenthal 2007).
Water shortages are already influencing investment decisions
in the electricity industry. For example, Swanbank and Tarong
will soon use recycled water from the Western Corridor
Recycling Project, in order to reduce the reliance on fresh water.
It is estimated that this move will cost several times more than
the A$200–300/ML now being paid for water from Wivenhoe
Dam, adding A$5–10/MWh to the current generation cost
(A$35) (Roberts 2007a). The new Kogan Creek power station
in Queensland uses dry cooling tower technology which
reduces water consumption by approximately 90%, although
some thermal efficiency may be lost.
In Victoria, Snowy Hydro acquired two gas-fired power
stations in 2007 to enable the company to meet its
contractual obligations when water levels in its dams are
low. As part of Snowy Hydro’s EPA licence, generation
from the gas-fired stations is restricted in order to control
emissions. Snowy Hydro, however, has already requested
that the restriction be eased, because of the lack of water
for hydropower generation.
Preparing for the future
Water security is key to energy security, yet recent
policy reforms fail to account for this, with unintended
consequences. There is scope for the industry, with sound
policy support, to improve its preparedness for the future.
Some ways forward are:
• Greater ‘climate change’ accountability in the industry,
through carbon pricing and increased support for clean
energy technology.
• Improved understanding of the links between price and
consumption of electricity and water, particularly in the
context of the NEM.
• Careful consideration of water resources in investment
decisions. This includes choice of electricity generation
technology and cooling system, location of plants, and the
needs of other water users, including the environment.
• Identification of the links between electricity and water in
the wider Australian economy. In particular, quantifying
embedded electricity and water consumption of key economic
sectors, and understanding if the links have consequences
for the application of policies in other sectors.
• Understanding of the social implications of the links, such
as the impact on rural livelihoods, and how the value that
customers place on water and electricity services impacts
on consumption behaviour.
References
Cohen, R., Nelson, B. & Wolff, G. 2004, Energy down the drain,
the hidden costs of California’s water supply, NRDC and Pacific
Institute.
EPRI 2002, Water & Sustainability (Volume 3): U.S. Water
Consumption for Power Production – The Next Half Century,
Palo Alto CA.
Gordon, J. & Kleinman, R. 2007, ‘Power and water bills set to soar’,
The Age, 12 April.
James, K., Campbell, S.L. & Godlove, C.E. 2002, Watergy:
Taking Advantage of Untapped Energy and Water Efficiency
Opportunities in Municipal Water Systems, Alliance to Save
Energy.
Ludlow, M. & Wisenthal, S. 2007, ‘Drought drains Beattie’s coffers’,
Australian Financial Review, 22 March.
Roberts, G. 2007a, ‘Big bills to pump water for power – NSW
decides’, The Australian, 15 March.
Voutchkov, N. 2005, ‘From Research to Environmental Permitting,
Construction, Start-up and Operations...Managing the Project and
the Process’, AWA Specialty Conference Membranes & Desalination,
Australian Water Association, Adelaide South Australia.
EN
Energy and Desalination
By Associate Professor Sandra Kentish, University of Melbourne,
and Professor Stephen Gray, Victoria University
As Australia moves to secure water supplies for major urban
areas, reuse, recycling and water desalination programs are
becoming an important component of city water strategies.
While primary and secondary water treatment processes
for water reuse appear to be financially and technologically
viable, the energy consumption and subsequent greenhouse
gas emissions associated with the desalination of both
recycled brackish water and seawater are of major concern
to the community.
Traditionally, desalination processes used energy-intensive
distillation technology. In this case the water was simply
boiled, with the condensed vapor providing substantially
pure water. More recently, membrane-based systems,
principally reverse osmosis (RO), have been commercialised.
12
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Indeed, almost all major desalination facilities in operation
or in planning in Australia use RO membranes.
An RO membrane consists of a thin polyamide selective layer
that is less than one micron thick. Flow through this selective
layer is thought to be by a solution–diffusion mechanism. That
is, the water molecules dissolve into the free spaces between
polymer chains and then diffuse across the membrane in a
dissolved state. The voids within the polymer are transient and
typically of Angstrom to nanometer size. Ionic salts (principally
sodium chloride) are rejected by the membrane because of
their larger size but also because these charged species are
repelled by the membrane surface which is also charged. A
typical desalination membrane will reject 99% of the salt ions.
A support layer, composed of microporous polysulfone or other
similar plastic, provides mechanical strength without further
restricting flow. The flat sheet composite membrane is usually
wound into a spiral orientation that allows up to 1,000 square
metres of membrane area per cubic metre of volume.
RO processes are generally more energy efficient than
distillation, but still consume large quantities of energy.
Indeed, energy costs currently represent 40–50% of the cost
of desalinating seawater. Fundamentally, a large amount of
energy is required to overcome an intrinsic thermodynamic
barrier. That is, we are trying to produce water by making a
salty solution more salty, and this goes against the laws of
thermodynamics. The pressure that needs to be overcome
to remove water molecules from a salt solution is known as
the osmotic pressure — for seawater this is around 27 Bar. In
fact, seawater desalination requires around five times more
energy than tertiary treatment of brackish or recycled water,
due to the high salt content. Additional energy is required to
overcome the hydrodynamic or frictional resistance of the
membrane. Further, any fouling or scaling on the membrane
surface can have a significant impact on energy requirements.
As the selective membrane layer is often only 0.1 micron thick,
even small deposits of foulants can dramatically increase the
thickness of the layer through which the water must penetrate.
A buildup of salts rejected by the membrane within the foulant
layer can also lead to a much greater osmotic pressure within
this layer than for a clean membrane.
The energy demand has been reduced significantly over
the past few years through improvements in the upstream
pretreatment of the feedwater to remove foulants and
through the use of energy recovery devices such as Pelton
turbines. These mechanical devices recover the pressure
energy used in compressing the feedwater to RO pressures
(~60 Bar for seawater systems).
RO membranes at Sydney Olympic Park’s
wastewater reclamation plant
In May 2007, the CSIRO Water for a Healthy Country Flagship
program launched an Advanced Membrane Technologies
for Water Treatment Research Cluster with a goal of further
reducing this energy demand. The cluster involves nine
Australian universities and a number of research groups within
the CSIRO. Its aim is to investigate novel membrane materials
and modifications to membrane surfaces to reduce both
the hydrodynamic energy demand and the susceptibility to
fouling. The cluster will use nanotechnology, biomimetics and
functional materials to deliver new innovations in membrane
technology and cost-effective and highly-efficient water
recovery systems. Molecular modeling and computational
fluid dynamics will be used to better understand the way that
membrane materials interact with water, salts and foulants.
Building on this knowledge, the team will characterise and
develop predictive computational models of the separation,
fouling and transport processes occurring in inorganic and
organic membranes. Other team members will use this
information to build novel inorganic, organic and hybrid
membrane structures that are more fouling resistant and/or
offer less hydrodynamic resistance.
A desalination membrane test centre is being developed
at the University of Melbourne. This will initially compare
the performance of a range of commercial membranes. As
other team members develop novel membrane materials,
we will be able to assess their performance relative to
their commercial counterparts. The membrane separation
performance in both pure sodium chloride as well as mixed
salt solutions will be evaluated as well as their fouling
resistance. There are fundamentally two types of foulants that
need to be assessed. Scaling arises from the precipitation of
inorganic salts, such as calcium sulphate. This forms a thin
but tenacious layer on the membrane surface. Biofouling
arises from the adsorption of organic constituents (usually
referred to as Natural Organic Matter or NOM) from the
feedwater that can in turn serve as a substrate for biological
growth. Extracellular polymeric substances, especially
polysaccharides, are viewed as the major constituent of the
resulting slime layer. Addition of very low levels of chlorine
directly to the feedwater stream can be used to minimise
biological fouling. However, most polyamide membranes
fall apart if exposed to high levels of chlorine. Therefore, a
further aim is to evaluate membrane materials or surfaces
for their resistance to chlorine degradation (in collaboration
with the University of Texas).
Mechanisms for reducing membrane resistance include the
use of heated feedwater which increases the water diffusion
rate and thus increases the flux for a given osmotic pressure.
Alternatively, membrane distillation can be used. In this case,
heated water is passed on one side of a membrane and pure
water vapor passes through the pores. Such processes have
the potential to utilise low-grade heat from power stations
and other industrial processes, or solar energy. However,
the commercialisation of such systems is again limited by
the rapid increase in fouling that occurs as temperature
increases. With membrane distillation, super hydrophobic
membrane surfaces are also required to prevent membrane
pore wetting. If pore wetting occurs, salty water is able to
pass the membrane and contaminate the product water.
Scaling of membranes, as occurs for RO processes, is also
an issue for membrane distillation when treating waters with
elevated levels of scaling ions such as RO brine concentrate.
Standard microfiltration membranes have been used for
membrane distillation in the past, but renewed interest in this
technology now has many membrane suppliers developing
membranes for membrane distillation. High-flux membranes
are being developed, overcoming one of the main limitations
of previous membrane distillation systems.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
13
Research into membrane distillation and these associated
problems will form the focus of work at Victoria University.
Understanding the systems engineering issues will be
critical to developing cost-effective processes, along with
management strategies for wetting and scaling phenomena.
These will be determined by the particular application. For
instance, treatment of hot blow-down water in industrial
applications will have scaling issues, while energy recovery
and efficiency is more important for seawater desalination
applications. The configuration of membrane distillation
units in these various applications will differ significantly,
reflecting the importance of high energy efficiency against
reduced capital cost and large waste heat availability.
EN
Dry-Cooled Tower Technology
By John Harten, CS Energy
The team at CS Energy’s Kogan Creek Power Station is
gearing up for the first year of operation, following the
official opening of the project by the Queensland Premier
Anna Bligh in December 2007. After a 3-year construction
period, the 750 MW power station and adjacent coal mine
are complete. As Australia‘s largest single generating unit, the
Kogan Creek power station, situated near Chinchilla in southwest Queensland, is meeting Australia‘s growing demand for
energy, without adding to pressure on scarce water resources
in the Western Downs region of Queensland.
Kogan Creek Power Station
The power plant uses 90% less water than a conventional wetcooled power station, through the application of dry cooling
technology and water management practices. The design was
based on Siemens Varioplant Steam Power Plant concept. The
dry cooling technology is used in the air-cooled condenser
section of the plant, which cools and condenses the heated
steam after it has left the turbine. The air-cooled condenser
works ‘like a giant car radiator’, but instead of the air cooling
hot water in tubes it cools steam. The air-cooled condenser
at Kogan Creek consists of 48 fans, each with a nine metre
diameter, that induce a breeze to flow air over finned tubes
containing hot steam. The tubes have fins attached to provide
a large surface to dissipate the heat from the steam flowing
through them. The fans basically cool and condense the steam
back into water so it can be used again in the boiler.
Because Kogan Creek uses an air-cooled condenser, water
is only required on site for the boiler, domestic use and for
cooling machinery, and this water is sourced from local
bores. Kogan Creek is only the second power station in
Queensland with an air-cooled condenser (InterGen’s
Milmerran Power Station was the first) but the technology is
widespread internationally, where it is used in South Africa,
Iran, Europe and the United States.
14
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Air-cooled condenser fans up close
Kogan Creek is a ‘mine mouth’ power station, where coal is taken
directly from the mine pit, transported to the power station and
burnt in the boilers. The mine delivers up to 8,000 tonnes of coal
each day via a 4-kilometre overland conveyor. The boiler and
ancillary plant have been specially designed to handle unwashed
coal, which contains about 28% ash, mainly rock and dirt. Not
washing the coal conserves the limited water resources of the
region and contributes to the economics of the power station.
Kogan Creek is also highly energy efficient, thanks to the
supercritical design of the boiler, which uses a more efficient
process for transfer of the energy from the burning coal to
the water to produce the steam that drives the turbine and
generator. As a result, Kogan Creek’s combustion is 3–4%
more efficient than the subcritical coal-fired plants that
comprise most of the plant running in Australia. In terms
of greenhouse gas intensity, Kogan Creek Power Station
will have one of the lowest environmental emissions per
GWh of any coal-fired power station in Australia. It also has
specialised equipment to continuously monitor emissions
and super-efficient filter technology to reduce particle
emissions to state-of-the art dust levels.
EN
Water in Brown Coal: Blessing or curse?
By David Allardice, FAIE
Since a Victorian Government Royal Commission in 1891, it
has been recognised that the moisture content of Victorian
brown coals is a major obstacle to their effective utilisation.
This is equally true today, with the added concern that
evaporating this water in a conventional power station
increases the CO 2 emissions per MWh of electricity
generated by at least 25%. However, with Victoria’s water
supply problems during our extended drought, the question
has been raised as to whether the water in the coal should
now be regarded as an asset, to be maximised by selecting
higher-moisture brown coal fields for future development.
Current Latrobe Valley power stations dry the coal before
combustion in an integrated milling drying circuit, using hot
flue gas recycled from the furnace. The evaporated moisture
passes through the furnace and boiler and up the stack. The
energy to dry the coal cannot be recovered in these systems.
In such power stations, additional water is consumed in
the steam cycle to condense the steam exiting the turbine
before returning the condensate to the boiler. This water
demand, typically 2 tonnes per MWh is far more than the
total moisture in the coal consumed.
For many years, local brown coal research has aimed
at developing more efficient drying and dewatering
processes. Before global warming became a concern, these
developments focussed on reducing costs and improving
resource utilisation by reducing coal consumption. However,
they now have the added benefit of reducing the CO2
emissions by requiring less energy to dry or dewater the
coal. Dewatering processes by definition extract the water
in liquid form saving the latent heat that would have been
required to evaporate the moisture.
Dewatering processes that involve heating the brown
coal before extracting the water produce a water effluent
contaminated with dissolved salts from the coal and
dissolved organic compounds such as phenols from
its thermal decomposition. Generally, the higher the
dewatering temperature, the greater the contamination. The
contaminated water requires substantial treatment before
it can be used or disposed of. An example is Hydrothermal
Dewatering (HTD) that evolved as a slurry version of
the Evans-Siemon dewatering process, developed by AIE
Members David Evans and Stan Siemon at University of
Melbourne in the 1970s. HTD heats a brown coal slurry to
280–300ºC at pressures that prevent evaporation. HTD in
effect accelerates the coalification process, increasing the
apparent rank of the coal. Typically, 66% of the moisture in
Latrobe Valley brown coals can be separated in liquid form.
However, the high cost of the water treatment has been a
major disincentive to its commercialisation although there
are new variants of HTD still under development.
Another brown coal dewatering process is the Mechanical
Thermal Expression (MTE). This process is currently being
piloted at a 15 tonnes per hour scale at Loy Yang in a project
initiated by the CRC for Clean Power from Lignite. A coal water
slurry is heated to 150–200ºC and the water squeezed out with
a hydraulic press. MTE typically removes 75% of the water in
Latrobe Valley coals. Because of the lower temperature, the
recovered water is less contaminated than from HTD, but still
requires extensive clean up before re-use.
Some evaporative drying processes can also recover the coal
moisture in liquid form. Steam Fluidised Bed Drying (SFBD)
evaporates the moisture from brown coal in a steam fluidised
bed operating at 100–110ºC and close to atmospheric
pressure. The energy used to evaporate the moisture can be
substantially recovered using vapour recompression to heat
the fluid bed and condense the evaporated moisture. This
process can dry the coal to 10–12% moisture, removing more
than 90% of the moisture in the brown coal in a single step
and producing a water condensate suitable for industrial use
after minor treatment.
Loy Yang A and B power
stations and their associated
brown coal mine
The SFBD process was developed from the original
concept of Prof Potter at Monash University around 1980
and further improved by German technologists — the
German acronym for the process is WTA. Demonstration
plants in the 1990s in Germany and at Loy Yang led to an
improved ‘fine grain’ version of WTA. A 110 tonnes per hour
commercial fine grain plant is under construction by RWE
at its Niederaussem brown coal power station near Cologne.
Fine grain SFBD/WTA is the proposed drying technology
for the Monash Energy project in the Latrobe Valley and
the International Power demonstration retrofit project at
Hazelwood Power Station.
A Japanese consortium, NBCL, also piloted an evaporative
drying process for a coal oil slurry at its Morwell coal-to-oil
pilot plant in the 1980s. This process also achieved energy
and water recovery by vapour recompression. A 600 tonnes
per day low rank coal drying and briquetting plant using this
drying technology is under construction in Indonesia.
Climate change concerns have also accelerated efforts to
develop more efficient brown coal power generation systems
that use less coal, emit less CO 2 and reduce the water
consumption in the plant. The leading contender locally is the
HRL Integrated Drying Gasification Combined Cycle (IDGCC)
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
15
power generation process, which reduces CO2 emissions by
30%, water consumption by 50% and generation costs by 30%,
relative to current brown coal power stations. Planning for
a 400 MW commercial IDGCC demonstration plant is well
advanced. IDGCC can also recover some of the moisture in
the coal by condensing the vapour from a pre-drying step to
preheat the coal. However, the major water saving from IDGCC
is through its improved efficiency and the high proportion of its
generation from the gas turbine cycle which, unlike the steam
cycle, does not require cooling water.
In summary, there are technologies available or under
development to recover the moisture from brown coal, but
the motivation is generally to increase the overall process
efficiency and reduce the CO2 emissions. As a byproduct
from achieving CO2 savings, the recovered moisture can
provide a useful contribution to the process water demand
of brown coal plants but is unlikely to produce surplus water
for external use. The cost of the drying/dewatering plant and
the subsequent water treatment plant to clean it, make it
expensive water. It is therefore difficult to see an economic
justification for selecting a higher moisture coal, requiring
a larger drying and water treatment plant, in preference to
a lower moisture coal of similar quality.
EN
Meter Data Collection Trends in Australia
By Paul Nelsen, Managing Director, Itron Inc
Driven by a need to enhance conservation efforts, achieve
operational efficiencies, increase revenues and improve meter
data accuracy and customer service, many utilities throughout
Australia and New Zealand are turning to advanced meter
data collection and management technologies to improve
the utility landscape. Automatic Meter Reading (AMR)
technologies help electric, gas and water utilities collect
monthly billing data from meters remotely and automatically.
Several different communications media can be used to
transmit data seamlessly, including wireless, power line
carrier and telephone. Additionally, utilities are provided
lowered meter reading costs, increased read accuracy and
reduced cost through these automated technologies.
The world’s energy and water resources are being challenged
by population growth and climate change. Utilities must
responsibly manage natural resources in ways that guarantee
their commitment to deliver reliable service to customers.
Conservation programs are imperative in meeting the
needs of their communities during peak usage periods.
The Australian electricity market is pioneering the move
to full Advanced Metering Initiative (AMI) rollout. When
interval meter reads are combined with innovative software
solutions, utilities can analyse usage, identify and manage
peak load, forecast usage more accurately, and design
programs, based on detailed customer profiling and data
logging, that encourage responsible energy and water
consumption through demand response tariffs. For example,
the implementation of Itron’s AMR solutions make it possible
for authorities to gather data more frequently and efficiently,
saving substantial time and money while improving
customer service and increasing revenue certainty. With
the arrival of technologies, such as walk-by radio frequency
data collection for water, and the move towards even more
open architecture, today’s Australian utilities are leading the
move to more efficient systems.
EN
Marine Power: Waves, tides & currents
By Andrew Taylor, Project Engineer, AMOG Consulting
Wave and tidal energy are increasing slotted into publiclyespoused lists of the coming renewable energy mix, but this
industry is yet to make a big splash commercially. While
firms like AMOG are seeing increased business providing
specialist engineering analysis to marine energy device
developers from around the world, the field is at best just
into the early stages of commercialisation. Similarly to other
renewables — but perhaps a step or two behind — there is
significant potential, a long history of interest and a very
recent giddy-up coming from the shifting political mood in
response to climate change. Going forward from the existing
tiny base, wave and marine current energy devices will be
contributing an increasing amount to the world energy
mix. This will most likely continue to be led by significant
government encouragement in places such as Portugal and
the United Kingdom, where long-term targets as high as 20%
are being seriously suggested.
16
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Ocean movements as an energy resource
The global ocean covers over 70% of the earth’s surface and it
is continually in motion. Visitors to coastal locations across
the ages have been in awe at the power of these movements
— just think of south-west Tasmania or the ‘Horizontal
Falls’ off the Kimberly coast. The patterns and magnitudes
of the marine energy resource differ widely from place to
place. On foreseeable human time scales, these motions are
essentially exploitable forever without diminishment and
are naturally considered in the category of renewable. The
ocean’s kinematics are composed of quite different types of
motion, which when targeted for energy conversion lead to
very different technologies. Waves, tides and currents are
the broad categories considered here.
Surface waves in the ocean are generated by the action of
atmospheric winds, which are in turn ultimately driven by
the distribution of solar warming across the globe. Such
north-west of Australia have attracted interest over the
years — recall Senator Wilson Tuckey’s public promotion
of Western Australian tidal power’s potential for export.
However, the magnitude of the available resource is obviously
not the only, or even the prime, consideration in developing
energy extraction businesses.
Availability and survivability
Pelamis P-750 Wave Energy Converter in action
(Image copyright of PWP Ltd)
waves do not only act to accumulate and store energy
from the wind but can carry this energy over thousands
of kilometres to be eventually pounded against the coast.
Wave energy has long been recognised as having one of the
highest power densities available among all the exploitable
renewable energy resources, and has the additional
advantage that energy levels can be predicted several days
ahead. Like the wind resource, different locations are more
or less naturally endowed, with geophysical features such
as distant wind patterns and geography contributing to
the local occurrence of big regular swells. It is no surprise
that the surfing community also has a special interest in
such coastal locations and at least one instance has led to a
campaign against a wave energy installation on the basis of
potentially disturbing the quality of the surf.
Although the oceanic tides can be considered as long period
waves, tidal motions differ fundamentally from wind waves
as they are ultimately driven by gravitational attraction and
the relative movements of the earth, moon, sun and planets.
The pattern and magnitudes of the tides is a surprisingly
complex topic and local geographic features play a big role.
The rise and fall of the tide is very predictable at any one site
and the broadly diurnal or semidiurnal period is manifest in
the form of oscillating low head differentials and direction
swapping marine currents. Another source of predictable
marine currents are the thermally-driven ocean circulations
that lead to well known unidirectional flows such as the Gulf
Stream or the Kuroshio Current. There is some obvious
technology overlap between devices that exploit marine
currents and tidal flows. The huge tidal movements in the
CETO II deployment, February 2008
(Image copyright of Carnegie Corporation Ltd)
Ocean waves, tides and currents are variable energy sources
manifest as natural fluid motions in the earth’s system.
The pattern of energy availability in any one location
differs temporally from other sources such as wind and
solar, which is a significant consideration for distributed
electricity generation applications with regard to scheduling
diversification. However, with energy availability too
much of a good thing is a particularly major problem for
marine energy devices. That same energy density that is so
promising for exploitation is what renders the cruel sea such
a challenging place for engineering. Looking back over the
track record of trial installations, it is almost embarrassing
how many have been destroyed by underpredicted waves,
currents or the like. Subsequently device ‘survivability’ is a
key characteristic promoted by developers.
Markets
It almost goes without saying that the regulatory and
commercial environment for large-scale energy technologies
is now changing to the advantage of wave and tidal
applications, particularly with respect to greenhouse gas
emissions. Similar to wind, distributed electricity generation
sites at the scale of tens of megawatts is the primary end
use for wave and tidal plant in the immediate future. Direct
powering of desalination processes is however a very real
alternative application and most developers promote this
possibility for their devices. Of course, future market
development may also see hydrogen production or other
end uses evolve.
Technology
The most telling feature of the current state of wave
and marine current power devices is the general lack of
technological maturity. There is no comparison to the wind
industry’s three-bladed horizontal access turbine, which
for better or worse is now the ‘normal’ way to capture wind
energy on a large scale. A plethora of ocean device hopefuls
and start-ups are only at the stage of scaled prototype testing.
There is a wide range of wave and marine current devices
being pursued, with some field leaders but no clear winners.
On the other hand, some large commercial installations do
exist and plenty are already applying for planning permits
both in Australia and overseas. Investor confidence is at
present relatively low and government incentives are playing
a large role. Note that other marine renewables such as
OTEC or offshore wind are not discussed here.
Some readers will be aware of the significant legacy of
ocean engineering developed within the traditional offshore
industries — moorings, compliant floating structures,
subsea cables, marine growth and corrosion are known
factors. This ready-made economy of ancillary equipment,
expertise, codes and standards has meant that the wave and
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
17
tidal technologies are not starting from scratch. Similar
affinities also exist with aspects of the wind and hydro
sectors. Interested readers are encouraged to refer to the
following websites:
www.rise.org.au/info/Tech/
www.emec.org.uk/
www.oceanrenewable.com/
The bottom mounted CETO device being developed
by Carnegie Corporation has received some press, with
developmental trials at Freemantle. Seemingly a little less
progressed commercially, Biopower Systems was recently
awarded a A$5 million Renewable Energy Development
Initiative grant from AusIndustry to further develop and
test their ‘biomimitic’ wave and current devices.
www.carbontrust.co.uk/technology/
technologyaccelerator/marine_energy
www.pelamiswave.com
www.oceanlinx.com
www.carnegiecorp.com.au/
www.biopowersystems.com
Here, we categorise the serious candidates as being either
‘wave’ or ‘marine current’ devices, that are to be installed
either ‘onshore’, ‘near shore’ (10–25 metres depth) or ‘off
shore’ (> 30 metres depth). Modularity is an almost universal
approach amongst developers, allowing ‘farms’ of repeated
units. Also fairly common is piggybacking onto existing
installations such as breakwaters. As per the experience of
the hydro sector, there are a range of extraction concepts
that are no longer acceptable although technically possible.
A case in point are large tidal barrages such as the over 200
MW plant installed in the 1960s at La Ranch. In general, it
is these factors beyond the nuts and bolts of the device that
play a huge role in determining the viability of a technology.
A detailed but high-level triple bottom line evaluation
across the lifecycle of a generic device suggests that of all
the categories listed above, offshore wave devices are the
most preferable general option, though local details and
opportunities seem set to result a variety of installations.
Australia
All of the existing installations in Australia are essentially
prototypes. Oscillation Water Column device developers
Oceanlinx (previously Energetec) have been in the news with
their prototype at Port Kembla in NSW, and claim to be in
‘advance permitting stages’ for a proposed 27 MW floating
installation at Portland, Victoria.
Oceanlinx device – one-third scale (Image copyright of Finsbury Ltd)
18
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Proposed commercial CETO array
(Image copyright of Carnegie Corporation Ltd)
A much publicised but failed tidal proposal was the
planned large tidal barrage near Derby in Western Australia.
It made the news in the late 1990s but was rejected on
environmental grounds.
Overseas
Various governments around the world have begun
incentive programs directly aimed at maturing marine
energy technology. Notable examples include the United
Kingdom Carbon Trust’s Marine Energy Accelerator
program, the European Marine Energy Centre and the
English ‘Wave Hub’.
The ‘wave hub’ large-scale test facility has a small list of
participating technologies. A 2 MW wave farm of floating
Pelamis devices was launched in 2006 off Portugual helped
along by the generous feed-in tariffs offered for renewable
energy in that country. A quick web search will turn up news
of myriad planning applications and trials from the United
States to Korea. While the runs are not yet on the board
for installed capacity, the next few years will see quite
some change.
EN
Artist’s impression of a Pelamis wave farm
(Image copyright of PWP Ltd)
Articles
Australian Energy
ABARE’s national and state projections to 2029–30
In December 2007, ABARE (Australian Bureau of Agricultural
and Resource Economics) released its latest medium to
long-term projections of Australian energy consumption,
production and trade. The analysis covers the period from
2005–06 to 2029–30, with a focus on the medium term
to 2011–12. The projections are prepared using data from
ABARE’s surveys of energy usage, its projections of commodity
markets and its E4cast model, which was modified in 2007
to include representation of solar electricity generation.
The projections incorporate those policies that have been
implemented at the date of publication; policies announced
but not implemented are excluded. Therefore, the Australian
Government’s plan to introduce an emissions trading scheme
and increase the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target
(MRET) to 20% of electricity supply by 2020 have not been
included. Further, the projections do not include the impact
of climate change on economic growth. These projections can
be thought of as the ‘business-as-usual’ outlook.
Key policy measures modelled explicitly are: the Australian
Government’s MRET scheme; the NSW Government’s
greenhouse gas abatement scheme; the Queensland
Government’s gas scheme; and the Victorian Government’s
renewable energy target scheme. The MRET scheme requires
the annual generation of renewable electricity to increase by
9500 GWh from 2000 to 2010. Interim targets have been set
(commencing at 300 GWh in 2000) to ensure that there will be
consistent progress toward achieving the additional 9500 GWh
of renewable energy by 2010. It is assumed that this target is
maintained until 2020. In E4cast, the renewable energy target
is modelled as a constraint on electricity generation. However,
this requirement for renewable electricity generation is
reduced to account for renewable technologies that are not
explicitly modelled, such as solar water heaters. It is assumed
that about 23% of the MRET target will be met by technologies
that are not explicitly modelled in E4cast.
Energy consumption
Australia’s primary energy consumption is projected to grow
at an average rate of 2.2% per year, from 5,688 petajoules (PJ)
in 2005–06 to 6,479 PJ in 2011–12. Over the full outlook
period to 2029–30, primary energy consumption is projected
to grow at an average rate of 1.6%, reaching 8,298 PJ. Although
energy intensity is projected to continue to decline at around
1% per year, energy consumption per person is projected
to rise over the outlook period from 275 gigajoules (GJ)
in 2005–06 to 324 GJ in 2029-30. This represents the net
outcome of countervailing upward and downward pressures
on energy consumption growth in the medium term. Upward
pressures include the relatively strong assumed rate of GDP
growth of 3.0%, and a continuing strong demand for energy
by energy-intensive industries such as nonferrous metals.
Downward pressures on future primary energy consumption
include relatively high oil prices, government policies and
improvements in energy efficiency. The average annual rate of
end use energy efficiency improvement is assumed to be 0.5%
over the projection period for all fuels in non energy-intensive
sectors. In sectors containing energy-intensive industries, the
low capital stock turnover relative to other sectors is expected
to result in a lower rate of energy efficiency improvement
of 0.2%. The rate of energy efficiency improvement is
also assumed to be different in regions or sectors where
greenhouse gas abatement policies are in place. For example,
the NSW Government’s greenhouse gas abatement scheme is
expected to accelerate the rate of efficiency improvement in
the use of electricity in that state, and a higher rate of energy
efficiency improvement (0.7% per year) is assumed.
The E 4cast model also incorporates energy efficiency
improvements in the electricity generation sector, reflecting
expected technological developments over time. Thermal
efficiency improvement rates are determined exogenously
according to the maturity and capacity expansion rates of the
electricity generation technologies modelled. The electricity
generation module of the model allows for peak and offpeak
generation, and includes 18 generation technologies
including for the first time, photovoltaic electricity generation
technology, but not domestic photovoltaic panels nor
planned expansions to photovoltaic generation capacity, such
as the 154 MW Solar Systems plant planned for Victoria.
The future use of new generation technologies that are not
currently used in Australia is based on the investment cost
of each technology relative to those currently in use and
future cost assumptions. Though the model includes four
technologies that incorporate carbon capture and storage
(CCS) technologies, in the absence of an emissions trading
scheme, CCS is not expected to be used commercially over
the projection period because of its relatively high cost.
Primary energy consumption in Australia, by fuel
Coal’s share of primary energy consumption is projected to
decline from 41% to 35%, for the most part replaced by gas
(increase from 19% to 24%) and renewables (6% by 2029–30).
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
19
Sector projections
Energy consumption in Australia’s transport sector
The mining sector’s share of final energy consumption is
projected to increase from 6.7% in 2005–06 to 12.5% in
2029–30, overtaking the commercial/services and residential
sectors. This reflects the large number of energy-intensive
project developments that are assumed to take place over
the projection period. The basic nonferrous metal industries,
including alumina, are the major consumers of gas at the
end use stage. In total, the growth in basic nonferrous metal
energy consumption is expected to account for around 47%
of the projected increase in manufacturing sector energy
consumption between 2005–06 and 2029–30 (table 16).
The transport sector remains the largest energy-consuming
sector — 35.8% in 2029–30 (down from 39.1% in 2005–06).
Road transport is the largest energy consuming component
of the transport sector, and passenger motor vehicles were
the largest energy consuming sector within road transport.
Energy use in the road transport sector is projected to grow
by 0.9% per year over the projection period. This growth is
driven by energy use in road freight. However, consumption
of petrol is projected to increase modestly (0.1% per year),
because car ownership in Australia is reaching saturation
level as per capita income increases.
Copies of ABARE research report 07:24, Australian Energy:
national and state projections to 2029–30, are available for
download from http://www.abare.gov.au
EN
More fun with the future!
What do Cate Blanchett, Brad Pitt, Placido Domingo and your editor
have in common? … They are among the few people around the world
to take a ride in the BMW Hydrogen 7.
The BMW Hydrogen 7 looks and feels like the 760 series 260
HP luxury sedan it is. Its special features are subtly hidden
among the clean external lines and the comfortable interior.
Unlike other hydrogen cars available today, it has no fuel cells
– just a familiar (but new-fashioned) combustion engine;
one that can burn either petrol or hydrogen, which is a big
advantage that only the combustion engine can provide.
“Hydrogen infrastructure buildup is one of the biggest issues
in developing hydrogen vehicles and a hydrogen economy,”
said BMW Group’s Clean Energy Project Manager, Willibald
Prestl. “During that phase, combustion engine-driven
vehicles provide much more flexibility for the user being
able to use both existing conventional infrastructure and
oncoming hydrogen infrastructure.”
Granted the liquid hydrogen we used to refill was produced
from natural gas in China, but the BMW Hydrogen 7 was
created with a ‘solar hydrogen’ future in mind.
“BMW is the only developer using liquid hydrogen, and we
are now the leaders in cryogenic know-how,” said Mr Prestl.
“Other hydrogen vehicles use a compressed hydrogen system
— a technology that is easier to develop but gets only half
the energy for the same volume of fuel.”
The BMW Hydrogen 7 has range of 200 kilometres on
hydrogen and a further 500 kilometres on petrol. The idea is
to commute around town (where emissions quality is more
important) using hydrogen and emitting only steam, and use
petrol for long-distance trips where initially hydrogen will
not be available. The changeover is achieved with the push
of a button on the steering wheel.
“Another advantage of the combustion engine is that
it is a very robust und well-known technology, and all
infrastructure for producing combustion engines is already
in place,” said Mr Prestl.
20
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
BMW Hydrogen 7 at Federation Square, Melbourne (note the 2
fill points)
The key enabling technologies are the fuel management
system and the liquid hydrogen fuel system. To get the fuel:
air mix right requires a very detailed understanding of how
hydrogen burns, and there is a lot of know-how in the engine
management system.
“It is seamless to the driver, but it involved a lot of technical
development,” said Mr Prestl. “And, a lot of development
went into the additional hydrogen fuel system. Hydrogen
has a very low energy density at ambient temperature and
pressure. You can either compress it (up to 700 Bar) — but
that’s a lot of pressure to handle — or you can use relatively
low pressure (up to 5 Bar) and cool it down until it liquefies
(minus 253°C).”
“We have engineered a dispensing system and, in partnership
with major oil companies, we are putting hydrogen refuelling
facilities on service stations,” said Mr Schlüter. “It is not so
much of a technical challenge to deliver the hydrogen to
service stations but it is very expensive. In a hydrogen future,
delivery will be by pipeline or truck.”
In the BMW Hydrogen 7, the tank cools as the cold liquid
hydrogen is pumped in, and it stays cold because it is highly
insulated with space technology materials.
“It will take some generations of vehicles to get the cost of
these materials down enough for the car to be commercial,”
said Mr Prestl.
The other issue that might be on some people’s minds is
safety, but it turns out that liquid hydrogen is no more
dangerous than petrol, if handled correctly. In fact, it has
some safety advantages.
“It is very light and dissipates quickly,” said Mr Prestl. “If there
is a leak or a rupture (something we have not been able to
do to the tank because it is so strong) it would go straight
up. Also, hydrogen does not radiate heat so much when it
burns. In tests that involved relieving and burning the whole
contents of a tank via an outlet in the roof, the interior of the
car was undamaged. The main issue is that it is odourless, so
if it did leak you would not smell it. So, we have developed
special sensors with our partners and a hydrogen warning
system for the unlikely event of any leakage.”
BMW has produced 100 vehicles and placed them with
‘ambassadors’ to demonstrate the technology.
“It is a production car, but not a commercially-viable one,”
said Mr Prestl. “It will take a couple of generations to be
affordable. Unlike concept cars, anyone can drive it and
together our ambassadors have driven two million kilometres
with no major problems.”
To do this, they have needed refuelling facilities. The Linde
Group is the exclusive partner for BMW’s hydrogen events
around the world, and brought the refuelling equipment
from Germany.
“The refuelling system presented special challenges,” said
Thomas Schlüter of Linde Group’s Hydrogen Solutions.
“Challenges with the coupling and the storage containers
themselves.”
There are now more than 60 hydrogen refuelling stations
around the world, of which six are liquid hydrogen sites, all
in Europe or the United States.
Willibald Prestl refuelling at Linde Group’s
temporary Melbourne facility
Your editor can vouch for how easy it was to press a button
on the dash to open the fill point cover; attach the (somewhat
heavier) liquid hydrogen hose; and fill the tank. It is a closed
coupling that cannot disconnect while filling, and, there is
an initial pressure test with nitrogen. The ‘user-friendly’
coupling was developed in partnership with Honda and
General Motors. The plan is to develop one international
standard (rather than the 200 different petrol filling systems
around the world). BMW plans to develop a storage system
that combines high pressure and cryogenic temperatures as
a new breakthrough hydrogen technology
“We would like to get some new synergies and eliminate the
disadvantages of both systems,” said Mr Prestl.
It’s now too late for readers to get a ride in the BMW
Hydrogen 7 in Australia. The car and its refuelling system
are headed for the Beijing Olympics.
EN
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
21
Book Review
Lights Out
The electricity crisis, the global economy and what it means
to you, by Jason Makansi, John Wiley and Sons Australia Ltd,
RRP A$41.95 (inc. GST)
Not since Arthur Hailey ’s
gripping 1978 novel Overload
have I read a more riveting
book about the electricity
industry and its stakeholders.
The difference between the two
is that the former is fiction and
had a thrilling (but happy) ending, and much of the latter is
fact and the end-game may well be less inviting. Lights Out
paints a picture of the United States’ electricity industry
on the point of collapse, but importantly it also sets out a
pathway to salvation — if only the industry and consumers
are prepared to grasp a savvy, intelligent, new future.
The book is in three parts and opens with the worst case
scenario of ‘lights out’ mostly due to failing network
infrastructure and, in particular, the dysfunctional poorly
interconnected ‘third-world’ transmission systems under
constant strain to ‘wheel’ power according to the rules of
economic engineering rather than sustainable electrical
practices backed by sound infrastructure investment. At
work are the triple forces of deregulation, market-oriented
institutions and globalisation. Vulnerability is identified in
six key areas: deteriorating transmission grids, lengthening
fuel supply lines, lack of storage and standby back-up
power, lack of specialised workers to operate and maintain
the infrastructure, the interconnection of the grid from a
national security perspective and environmental impacts.
The first part of the book also has a brief, easy-to-read and
informative history of electricity supply and its changing
regulatory and commercial environments in the United States
under fun headings such as: Downing Street — The seeds of
privatisation are sown, Wall Street – Where investment
flows, and The Dark Street – Where electricity does not flow.
This part of the book is however far from totally negative
and offers glimpses, developed further in later chapters, on
how to prevent the worst case from happening by fixing up
transmission, limiting markets to where they work, building
back-up (storage) capacity, empowering consumers instead
of making them feel guilty, and acknowledging the need for
bulk central generation, in particular, nuclear and coal.
Part two of the book greatly expands on the insecurities,
vulnerabilities and the uneasy state of the industry. Of
particular global interest is the short chapter on ‘living with
a transaction economy’ with its ever-increasing speed and
diversity of endless transactions (and fee taking at every
point), almost for the sake of it. “Assets are no longer the
focal point of a valuable company anymore. The balance
22
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
sheet is.” In the past, “… engineers gold-plated the system by
adding layers of cost that were borne by consumers … today,
financial engineering is stripping away that gold-plating
and trading it back and forth to keep extracting profits at
the margins”.
Part three is aptly titled Fighting the last war, planning the
next one. Makansi describes the last war as the need to come
to grips with rapidly escalating electricity prices potentially
undermining the United States’ economy; escalating prices
due to expensive fuels such as LNG and natural gas, a poor
regulatory regime that discourages investment, and the
creation of markets that simply do not work. He sees the
next war as the need to find real solutions with the industry
“on the precipice of a new construction cycle for coal or
nuclear plants” but without “the industry and its regulators
having long-term solutions for high-level nuclear wastes or
carbon dioxide discharges”.
Part three does offer the potential for that elusive industry
salvation by setting out long-term solutions for electricity
storage, coal and extracting its full value, exercising the
nuclear options, empowering consumers, distributed power
and redefining the grid as an intelligent one.
Makansi concludes with a vision of the future that is built on
shifting government funding to networks and energy services
(including the really smart versions of smart meters); creating
the right investment environment for advanced nuclear
and coal plants, energy storage systems, renewables and
distributed power systems; full deregulation of the wholesale
market; deregulation of the retail market but with built-in
safeguards; minimising financial engineering; securing fuel
and component supply lines; and, above all, “make electricity
visible, understandable and part of our every day discourse”.
Lights Out is clearly an important, insightful book, written
by an author who knows how to communicate a complex
subject in bite-sized pieces that are informative and fun to
read. The fact that it is written largely from an American
perspective, with all that nation’s complexities and excesses,
should not deter Australian readers wanting to understand
what the electricity game is all about. For Australian industry
experts, the book is a must, if only for Australia to avoid
facing a similar nightmare.
Dr Harry Schaap
Dr Schaap is an Australian electricity industry expert
with wide experience in research and development,
environmental management, demand side management,
consulting and climate change.
Letter to the Editor
Editor,
RE: Having fun with the future on page 69 of September
2007 issue of EnergyNews
I am well aware that Sweden has an approach to generating
biofuels that differs markedly from that most other countries
are aspiring to. They will not, in the first instance, be using
food for fuel as in America and Brazil but timber grown
in places unsuited to growing food. Nevertheless, SAAB is
trying to sell its ‘BioPowered’ cars into food-fuelled markets
and that is just as reprehensible as growing the fuel — indeed
more so, since they are helping to create the demand for
such food-based fuel.
(driver only driver owned) car-based commuting. Engine
efficiency is roughly 15% and a driver weighs one-fifteenth
of the vehicle’s weight, so most of the energy in the fuel goes
to move the car rather than the driver and we’re down to
about 1% efficient. Then there is all the energy required to
make the car, transport it to its owner, maintain it during
its life and then recycle its materials once its life is over. So
we’re down to about 0.5% efficient?
It may be the case that Brazil’s sugar cane-based (and
Sweden’s wood-based) ethanol delivers energy at the bowser
greater than the total anthropogenic input required to
deliver it there, but America’s corn-based ethanol doesn’t
(see National Geographic, October 2007, as well as “Thirsty
biofuels threaten to take food off menu” on page 25 of The
Australian of 12 October 2007 and “Fuel for Thought:
Ethanol presents a dilemma to ethical motorists” on pages
221–222 of the October 2007 Qantas inflight magazine).
This calculation of a car’s efficiency says nothing about making
good the damage caused by the greenhouse contribution it
makes; the damage caused by the toxic gases and particulates
it releases; or the damage caused by the heat it raises (urban
heat islands). Nor does it provide for, maintain and pay for
the environmental costs of its infrastructure; nor of making
good (if that’s at all possible) the deaths and injuries caused
directly on roads and indirectly on the ‘battlefields of oil’. And
still people fiddle with changes to engine and fuel efficiency,
playing around with a few tenths of that 0.5% when putting
a second person into the car and simply cutting engine size
could double its efficiency. In the light of this, endangering
food supplies and the planet’s fertility is madness.
The contradictions in driving a food-fuelled car are not
only matters of ethics. Of particular concern are the gross
inefficiencies that would not be countenanced elsewhere. All
automobile fuel and engine design changes run up against the
implacable reality of the catastrophic inefficiency of DODO
Best regards,
Frank Fisher, FAIE
Adj Prof, Swinburne University/Assoc Prof,
Monash University
(Inaugural) National Environmental Educator of the Year
National Energy Essay Competition
The AIE is proud to support the national essay competition addressing the long-term future possibilities for primary sources
of electrical energy in Australia. Institute President, Murray Meaton, will be one of the judges, and we encourage all young
energy professionals to participate. The activity aims to energise the young to study Australia’s energy future — their energy
future — and to introduce a rigorous and disciplined level of information into the public arena to improve the quality of the
debate regarding the next phase of primary sources of energy for the production of electrical power to the east and west
principal Australian integrated electrical networks (“the grids”).
The competition is open to Australian citizens and permanent residents under 31 years of age as at 30 June 2008. There is
a cash prize pool of $91,000, providing for four prizes each of $20,000, and one prize of $1,000 to an entry submitted by a
person(s) under 22 years old, awarded by a Judging Panel, and an additional prize of $10,000 awarded to the entry chosen
from amongst the winners by the interested public. Entrants can be individuals or teams of up to three members (all must
meet the entry requirements).
The essay is to consist of parts A and B. Part A will address the primary energy sources for electricity generation for the period
2010 to 2050, considering economic, environmental and societal impacts within a sustainability framework; coal, gas, hydro,
nuclear, solar, wind, geothermal and other renewables; whole-of-life perspective; and the changing needs of society and industry
resulting from technology commercialisation. Part B will postulate the prospective energy sources for the 50 years beyond
2050, considering a longer-term view of energy sources in the light of promising research developments.
The competition opens on 31 March 2008 and closes at 5 pm on 30 June 2008.
The activity has been initiated by, and will be managed by The Warren Centre for Advanced Engineering — an independent,
industry-linked institute committed to fostering excellence and innovation in advanced engineering throughout Australia.
For more information, email [email protected] or visit www.warren.usyd.edu.au under ‘Projects’.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
23
Membership Matters
The members’ section of EnergyNews
EnergyNews welcomes contributions to Membership Matters, included member profiles, company
member profiles, anecdotes, and advertising. Send ideas and contributions to [email protected]
Changes to Membership
New Members
Name
Grade
Dr Graeme Couch
Mr Roy Chamberlain
Mr Mike Bagot
Mr Roy Mock
Mrs Fabiola Sturrock
Member
Member
Student
Associate
Member
New Company Members
Company Name
Areva Australia
Integrated Environmental Technologies
Sefca Pty Ltd
Invensys Process Systems
Members Resigned
Name
Dr John Montagner
Mr Cliff Bell
Branch
Sydney
Sydney
Melbourne
Sydney
Perth
Name
Ms Charnene Hanchard
Ms Jaimee Thompson
Dr Priyangshu Sarma
Mr Yoshihiko Nakagawa
Mr Stephen Kenihan
Grade
Student
Associate
Fellow
Associate
Member
Representatives
Branch
Mr Thierry Lopez De Arias
Dr Selena Ng
Mr George Jerzyk
Mr Robert Thompson
Mr Anthony Revell
Mr Robert Ibrahim
Mr Martin Burns
Mr Jeremy Sampson
Mr Honpei Ho
Branch
Sydney
Perth
Branch
Melbourne
Melbourne
Overseas
Sydney
Melbourne
Perth
Perth
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Perth
Perth
Sydney
Name
Mr Jun Yoshimura
Branch
Sydney
Members Cancelled By Default
Mr Maung Amanullah
Mr Robert Gordon
Mr Andrew Hughes
Mr K Kumar
Mr Lachlan Mckenzie
Ms Pavla Meakin
Mr Suwi Sandu
Mr Gilles Walgenwitz
Mrs Chloe Weiter
Mr Jonathan Wood
Ms Bethanie Adams
Mr Steve Aggenbach
Mr Mark Amos
Ms Amy Anderson
Mr Bill Callister
Mr Keith Clark
Mr Cameron Cochrane
Mr Peter Coombes
Mr Peter Cowling
Mr Bradley Curtis
Mr Peter Dane
Mr John Deacon
Mr John Doutty
Mr Michael Dwyer
Mr Craig Farrugia
Mr John Flynn
Mr Terry Fogarty
Mr Matthew Forrest
24
Melbourne
Sydney
Canberra
Melbourne
Melbourne
Melbourne
Sydney
Sydney
Perth
Melbourne
Canberra
Melbourne
Sydney
Sydney
Brisbane
Sydney
Brisbane
Sydney
Melbourne
Sydney
Perth
Sydney
Adelaide
Brisbane
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Brisbane
Mr Robert Fraser
Mr Mike George
Mr George Gollagher
Mr Rodney Gooding
Mr Upali Gooneratne
Mr Harold Grundell
Mrs Dora Guzeleva
Mrs Linda Gyzen
Mr Alan Haines
Mr Robert Haines
Mr Ian Hardiman
Mr Mark Harper
Mr Peter Harris
Mr Todd Henderson
Mr Michael Hunt
Mr Graeme F Hunter
Mr. Doug Hyde
Mr John Jardine
Mr Daryl Jones
Mr David Kano
Mr Liam Kean
Mr Jason Lagowski
Mr Grahame Lewis
Mr Chris Lloyd
Ms Val Lomax
Mr James Lumsden
Mr Stephen Martin
Mr Nick Mccready
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Sydney
Melbourne
Brisbane
Canberra
Overseas
Brisbane
Perth
Sydney
Adelaide
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Brisbane
Melbourne
Sydney
Brisbane
Sydney
Sydney
Brisbane
Sydney
Overseas
Melbourne
Sydney
Melbourne
Adelaide
Adelaide
Melbourne
Perth
Mr Peter Mcglinn
Mr Stephen Melville
Mr Bill Nagle
Mr Phillip Neuss
Mr Robert Price
Ms Sally-Anne Rowlands
Mr Glenn Shaw
Mr Colin Smith
Ms Erica Smyth
Mr James Staig
Mr Brian Steffen
Mr Philip Stevenson
Mr Rodney Toakley
Mr Warwick Tudehope
Mr Doug Vincent
Ms Patricia Williams
Mr Sam Woodcock
Mr Barry Wooton
Ms Irene Wyld
Ms Ellen Young
Mr Kenneth Boyes
Mr Christopher Thomas
Mr Qin Liu
Mr Marcus Mckay
Mr Benjamin Stephenson
Mr Salem Talib
Sydney
Perth
Canberra
Sydney
Adelaide
Perth
Melbourne
Sydney
Perth
Perth
Sydney
Melbourne
Brisbane
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Melbourne
Sydney
Melbourne
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Sydney
Canberra
Sydney
Sydney
Around the Branches
Canberra
South Australia
• Mr Burt Beasley, Director Technology and Innovation,
Australian Coal Association, presented “Challenges facing
the Australian coal industry” on 19 December 2007.
Melbourne
• The Hon Peter Batchelor MP, Victorian Minister for
Energy & Resources, presented “Roadmap to Victoria’s
Energy Future – a 2020 Vision” on 8 November 2007.
• The Melbourne Young Energy Professionals held their
inaugural meeting on 15 November 2007, when Jeff
Cochrane, Chief Executive, Monash Energy, led an
informal discussion around the topic “Develop your
energy career and see the world at the same time.”
• John Franklin, also with Monash Energy, presented a
witty recollection of his experiences and challenges in a
joint venture project in China to the Melbourne Branch
AGM Dinner on 28 November 2007.
Newcastle
• David Wood, School of Engineering, The University of
Newcastle, and Aerogenesis Australia, presented “Taking
Newcastle's Wind Energy Research to the World” at the
national and branch AGM on 27 November 2007.
Perth
• Mr Jim Mitchell, Managing Director, Synergy, presented
“WA's New Energy Market:18 months on” at a lunch on
1 November 2007.
• Perry Sioshansi, Menlo Energy Economics, California
presented “Having your cake and eating it too – can
California have adequate energy while meeting stringent
emission restrictions?” on 21 November 2007.
• Stuart Hall, Chief Executive Officer, Marathon Resources
Ltd, presented “Marathon Resources: Participating in the
international uranium market” on 25 October 2007.
• Peter Scott, General Manager External Affairs Oil
Products, Shell Australia/Oceania Shell Company of
Australia Limited, talked to the theme “The Evolution of
Movement Continues…” on 22 November 2007.
• Steve Edwell, Chairman, Australian Energy Regulator,
presented “The State of the Energy Market: 2007 review
and future challenges” on 11 December 2007.
Sydney
• The Young Energy Professionals Group hosted a seminar
on communication and influencing skills with Nicola
Rothmann of Nous Group on 9 October 2007.
• AIE Sydney Branch and CSIRO Centre for Distributed
Energy & Power hosted a half-day symposium, “Distributed
Energy – Ready, Willing & Able” on 16 October 2007.
• Jointly with AIE Hydrogen Division, hosted an evening
presentation on “Hydrogen Energy Futures” on
5 November 2007.
• Nick Florin, winner of the 2006 AIE/ECA Scholarship,
gave a photographic presentation from his study tour
of Europe and Japan at the Young Energy Professionals
end-of-year meeting on 29 November.
• Three speakers – Stephen Schuck (Bioenergy Australia),
Gavin Hughes (CSR Ethanol) and Rob McKenna (Lane
Cove Council) presented at a technical meeting with the
topic, “Biofuels: From policy makers to producers to end
users” on 3 December 2007.
For forthcoming AIE events, see http://www.aie.org.au/
events.htm. For Melbourne Branch events, see https://pams.
com.au/aie
Young Energy Professionals
Melbourne YEP’s Inaugural Event
AIE Melbourne Branch hosted its first meeting for young energy professionals
on 15 November 2007. Here, branch YEP representative Mike Bagot reports.
The first in our YEP seminar series was held at the offices
of the Victorian Department of Innovation, Industry
and Regional Development, and attracted 22 young
postgraduates and employees. We were fortunate to have
Jeff Cochrane, CEO, Monash Energy, to present an overview
of his career path and to lead a discussion of the factors
necessary for successful navigation through the ‘reefs’ of
early employment. First, Jeff spoke on the possible future
trends in the global energy market based on political,
economic, environmental and social considerations, with
specific emphasis on Australia. He noted that the path he
has trodden in his professional life is a very different one to
what we are likely to follow. Jeff also gave us a brief update
on the lignite gasification plant proposed for the LaTrobe
Valley, including details of the planned sequestration and
storage technology. This generated a lot of interest from
the audience.
Most attendees stayed on after the seminar to socialise and
enjoy the refreshments provided. I was impressed by the level
of enthusiasm and interest circulating through the room.
There is, without doubt, a vibrant group of young people
entering the energy sector. Most of the jobs we will be doing
in our careers have not been created yet, but now we need to
network and build relationships with contemporaries. This
is the foundation of the Melbourne YEP group.
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
25
Study Scholarship Report
Nick Florin was awarded the first Australian Institute of Energy and Energy Council
of Australia joint study scholarship in 2006. In May 2007, he took the opportunity
to travel to Europe and Japan on a study tour. This is his brief tour report.
The study tour timed perfectly with the final months of
my PhD research (just submitted early 2008). My project
investigated hydrogen production from biomass via a
thermochemical conversion process. For the process, I
developed a CO2 sorbent that captures carbon emissions in
biomass gasifiers resulting in an enhanced hydrogen yield.
This work was carried out in the School of Chemical and
Biomolecular Engineering at The University of Sydney.
My first stop was Germany, where I presented my research
at the 15th European Biomass Conference in Berlin. This was
the world’s largest general meeting in this field. Hot topics in
Berlin included: lignocellulosic ethanol, and the concept of
a mobile biorefinerey. Making the biomass refinery mobile
eliminates the energy penalties associated with transporting
bulk biomass feedstock. I was inspired, learning a lot about
exciting cutting-edge research in my field and receiving
valuable feedback for my own work.
After the conference, I visited the Department of
Decentralised Energy Conversion at the University of
Stuttgart. There, experimental research is on a large scale,
with a power station on the campus providing heating and
electricity for the university. It was clear to me that Sydney
University could do well with a large-scale biomass gasifier
for organic campus wastes.
University of Stuttgart power station
After travelling through Germany and France I left
continental Europe and continued my study tour in the
United Kingdom. While in London I visited a novel carbonneutral housing initiative called Beddington Zero Energy
Development (BedZED). As well as incorporating a range
of environmentally sustainable design features like ‘green
roofs’, the development has a combined-heat-and-power
plant which uses wastes from a local tree surgery operation.
The electricity and heat generated is distributed on site.
I also spent a few days in Cambridge where I visited the
Department of Chemical Engineering and discussed issues
relevant to scaling up the process we have developed at
Sydney University.
On my way home I made a stopover in Japan, where I
visited two research groups and presented my research.
I was particularly fortunate to tour the facilities of the
Japanese National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science
and Technology. I also visited academics at the Tokyo
Metropolitan University, and participated in a seminar
series. It was a great opportunity to see how research is
conducted in world-class laboratories and have discussions
with leading scientists face-to-face.
Nick cycling to the conference in Berlin
26
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
Overall, I had an awesome time! As a young energy
professional (YEP), I know the experience benefited my early
career, and I am very grateful to the Institute and Council
for the opportunity. I strongly recommend all YEPs apply
this year. [Applications close 3 April; see notice on page 99
of December 2007 issue of ENERGYNEWS, ed.].
Hydrogen Matters
Federal Government Review
of Hydrogen Energy Technology
Last September the (then) Commonwealth Department
of Industry, Tourism and Resources (now Department of
Resources, Energy and Tourism) commissioned the Wyld
Group to develop a Hydrogen Technology Roadmap for
Australia. The roadmap will be completed in April 2008 and
the outcome will be presented at the 17th World Hydrogen
Energy Conference in June (WHEC2008). The report will
include an update of the Australian Hydrogen Activity
(2005). If you are involved in any hydrogen-related projects
or developments and want to ensure that you are included in
this update, please contact Dr John Söderbaum at the Energy
and Environment Division of the department on (02) 6213
7865 or email [email protected]
National Hydrogen
Materials Alliance Workshop
A 2-day workshop was held in Melbourne on 30–31 January
2008. Project leaders of the CSIRO alliance presented the
results of their research to fellow members of the alliance
and other stakeholders from government, academia and
industry. The second day was more introspective and
gave the members an opportunity to assess their research
critically and review alliance progress half way through its
3-year term. The overall response to the workshop was very
positive with attendees engaging in a lively discussion of
developments in new materials for hydrogen production,
storage and utilisation. The next alliance workshop will be
held in Brisbane to coincide with WHEC2008 in June.
International Standards
Organisation to meet in Brisbane
The International Standards Organisation, the peak
body responsible for setting many technical standards
throughout the world, has a technical committee (TC/197)
that is devoted to hydrogen technologies. TC/197 will be
holding a workshop and meeting two days before the start
of the World Hydrogen Energy Conference in June this
year. Anyone interested in taking part in the workshop
should, in the first instance, contact Luigi Bonadio on
(03) 9380 8274 or email [email protected]. The Chairman
of TC/197, Randy Dey, has been invited to give a plenary
lecture at the conference.
WHEC2008
WORLD HYDROGEN ENERGY CONFERENCE
REGISTRATIONS NOW OPEN
Register before 4 April to catch the early-bird rate
Student & Day Rates Available – Go to www.whec2008.com
For a hard copy of the registration brochure, contact the organisers:
ICMS Pty Ltd
PO Box 3496
Ph: (07) 3844 1138
South Brisbane
Fax: (07) 3844 0909
Queensland 4101 Australia
email: [email protected]
WHEC2008
As regular readers are aware, the 17th World Hydrogen
Energy Conference will be held in at the Brisbane
Convention and Exhibition Centre on 15–19 June 2008.
After many months of organisation, the event is taking shape
and promises to be a highlight on the AIE national calendar.
Over 500 abstracts of oral and poster presentations have
been received so far, on a wide range of topics: hydrogen
production from coal, natural gas, biomass and renewables;
high and low-temperature fuel cells; standards, safety and
education; and outreach initiatives. A team of reviewers
with specialised knowledge has been assembled to evaluate
the submissions and upon completion, a draft conference
program for will be published on the conference website
www.whec2008.com which will be updated at regular
intervals. Please check online for the latest updates.
The overwhelming response by willing presenters has been
matched by a high commitment to sponsorship. The premier
sponsor for the event is the Queensland State Government,
but substantial financial support is also provided by the
Commonwealth Government (Department of Resources
Energy and Tourism and Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations). Industrial sponsors
include BOC, Linde and Rio Tinto and many other
organisations are helping to market the event locally and
internationally. The conference will stage an exhibition
including national pavilions and booths from Canada, the
United States, several European countries, and a variety of
industry contributions from Australia.
The conference comprises a series of plenary sessions each
morning, with five parallel sessions of specialised topics
in the afternoons. These will include sessions devoted to
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
27
Hydrogen Matters
Continued
commercialisation and finance in the hydrogen and fuel cell
industry, and activities of the International Energy Agency and
the International Partnership for the Hydrogen Economy.
A special feature of WHEC2008 is the inaugural International
Hydrogen and Fuel Cells (H&FC) Education Forum that
will gather Australian and international students, teachers,
academics and various government officials to participate
in a series of coordinated lectures, workshops and
presentations covering many aspects of H&FC technology.
Student teams will work through a set of ‘hands-on’ practical
activities while teachers engage in dedicated workshops to
improve on the scope and quality of science-based school
learning, particularly for engineering, design and technology
subjects. The forum managers extend an invitation to all AIE
members to attend the forum. Educators working at any
level of the education system and industry representatives
are welcome to participate and contribute to forum planning
and delivery. The forum is proudly supported by Blue Cell
Energy, Queensland Department of Education, Training and
the Arts, Engineers Australia and the AIE, and is endorsed
by the International Association for Hydrogen Energy. For
more information please contact the Forum Manager, Luigi
Bonadio on (03) 9380 8274 or email: [email protected]
AIE Board 2008
PRESIDENT
Murray Meaton
Economics Consulting Services
Ph: (08) 9315 9969
email: [email protected]
Malcolm Messenger
Messenger Consulting Group
Ph: (08) 8361 2155
email: [email protected]
Colin Paulson
Ph: (02) 4393 1110
Mobile: 0422 030 830
email: [email protected]
Other honorary postions to be
decided at March board meeting
Paul Riordan
Department of the Environment,
Water, Heritage and the Arts
Ph: (02) 6275 9250
Mobile: 0403 399 439
email: [email protected]
David Allardice
Ph: (03) 9874 1280
Mobile: 0418 100 361
email: [email protected]
Tony Forster
Forster Engineering Services
Ph: (03) 9796 8161
email: [email protected]
Rob Fowler
Abatement Solutions – Asia-Pacific
Ph: (02) 8347 0883
Mobile: 0402 298 569
email: [email protected]
Paul McGregor
McGregor & Associates
Ph: (02) 9418 9544
email: [email protected]
Dennis Van Puyvelde
CO2CRC
Ph: (02) 6120 1612
Fax: (02) 6273 7181
email: [email protected]
Tony Vassallo
Ph: (02) 9810 2216
email: [email protected]
BRANCH REPRESENTATIVES
BRISBANE
Andrew Dicks
Ph: (07) 3365 3699
email: [email protected]
EDITOR
Joy Claridge
PO Box 298, Brighton, VIC 3186
Ph: (03) 9596 3608
Mobile: 0402 078 071
email: [email protected]
SECRETARIAT
Australian Institute of Energy
PO Box 193
Surrey Hills VIC 3127
Ph: 1800 629 945
Fax: (03) 9898 0249
email: [email protected]
Gerry Watts
Ph: (03) 6259 3013
Mobile: 0418 352 543
email: [email protected]
Branch and Division Secretaries
Brisbane
Dr Patrick Glynn
Ph: (07) 3327 4636, Fax: (07) 3327 4455
Mob: 0409 610 823
email: [email protected]
Canberra
Ross Calvert (Acting Secretary)
Ph: (02) 6241 2865
email: [email protected]
Hydrogen Division
Bradley Ladewig
ARC Centre of Excellence for
Functional Nanomaterials
Ph: (07) 3346 3813, Fax: (07) 3346 3973
email: [email protected]
28
Melbourne
Glenne Drover
Regional Development Victoria
Ph: (03) 9651 9360
email: [email protected]
Newcastle
Jim Kelty
Ph: (02) 4961 6544
email: [email protected]
Perth
Dougal West
WA Office of Energy
Ph: (08) 9420 5651, Fax: (08) 9420 5700
email: [email protected]
EnergyNews — Volume 26 No. 1 March 2008
South Australia
Graeme Atwell
Ph: 0418 776 616
email: [email protected]
Sydney
David Hemming
NSW Department of Energy and Water
Ph: (02) 8281 7406, Fax: (02) 8281 7451
email: [email protected]
Tasmania
Sue Fama
Ph: (03) 6230 5305
email: [email protected]
Company Member Directory
Electricity.
Some people make it,
sell it or regulate it.
ElectraNet,
moves it.
ElectraNet
owns and manages
the South Australian
transmission system
in the National
Electricity Market.
www.electranet.com.au
Connell Wagner is one
of Asia-Pacific’s largest
and most experienced
multi-disciplinary engineering
consulting firms.
Its Energy Group provides
engineering and technical
advisory services to the power
generation, substation,
transmission and distribution,
and oil and gas industries.
We specialise in all facets
of renewable and
conventional energy projects:
feasibility studies,
project development,
design, owner’s engineer
and construction
management, strategic
technical advice,
refurbishments, operations
and maintenance.
www.conwag.com
Clyde Bergemann
Senior Thermal Pty Limited
Wesfarmers
Premier Coal
www.clydebergemann.com.au
www.premiercoal.com.au
United Energy
Distribution Pty Limited
Motor Trade Association
of South Australia Inc.
www.mta-sa.asn.au
www.unitedenergy.com.au
Watermark is a leading
Australian intellectual
property firm,
with offices in Sydney,
Melbourne and Perth.
We have extensive
experience and specific
expertise in the protection
and management of IP
in the field of energy
technology, including:
oil and gas, renewable
energy, power engineering,
electricity generation
and energy-efficient
vehicle design.
Call to explore how we can
help you.
www.watermark.com.au
Freehills
www.freehills.com.au
Department of
Mines and Energy
www.dme.qld.gov.au
Calendar
Forthcoming AIE Events in 2008
If your branch is organising an event in the second half of 2008, send details to [email protected] to promote the
event in the EnergyNews. Allow for the lead time — events scheduled from July onwards need to be notified
by the middle of May to appear in June issue.
Other Events 2008
1–3 April in Shanghai, China
Carbon Trade China 2008 http://www.chinacarbontrade.com.cn/
6–9 April in Perth
APPEA 2008: Energising Change http://www.appea2008.com.au
17–18 April in New York, USAGlobal Marine Renewable Energy Conference
http://www.globalmarinerenewable.com/
24–26 April in Budapest, HungaryRENEXPO Central and South-East Europe 2008
http://www.energy-server.com
6–9 May in Prague, Czech Republic12th European Power Generation Strategy Conference
http://www.wbr.co.uk/powereurope
15–18 May in Surfers Paradise
Fuel for Thought, PICA Qld Conference http://www.pica.net.au/
26–27 May in SydneyExcellence in Oil & Gas
http://www.resourcefulevents.com/page/excellence-in-oil-and-gas
29–30 May in Sydney9th annual National Emissions Trading Summit
http://www.informa.com.au
15–19 June in Brisbane
WHEC 2008 http://whec2008.com
23–25 June in NewcastleInternational Symposium on Advanced Gas Cleaning Technology
(GCHT-7) http://livesite.newcastle.edu.au/gcht/
22–23 July in SydneyAustralian Energy and Utility Summit
http://www.acevents.com.au/energy2008
8–10 October in Paris, FranceInternational Gas Union Research Conference
http://www.igrc2008.com/
9–10 October in Augsburg, Germany RENEXPO 2008 http:// www.renexpo.com
24-26 November in Gold CoastClean Energy Council Conference & Exhibition 2008
http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au
Please note that the events listed here are based on information sent to the Institute by event organisers.
The AIE does not necessarily endorse the views of the speakers. The events are brought to the attention of
members as potentially contributing to discussion on relevant energy issues. If you know of any conferences
or other major events that would be of interest to AIE members and will be held from July 2008 to June 2009
please email details and web link to [email protected]