EQ2-Carbon Flashcards
Difference between primary+ secondary energy resources
- primary= consumed in raw form (fossil fuels) (or renewable)
- secondary= when primary resources generate electricity that flows thru power lines+ infrastructure to power homes+ businesses
Domestic and foreign energy sources
-from own country whereas foreign energy sources imported from another country
Non- renewable and renewable energy sources
- non- renewable from exploitation= eventually -> exhaustion
- renewable= continuous flows of nature- can be constantly reused
Energy security
Being able access reliable+ affordable sources energy which may be domestic / from ‘friendly countries’
Energy ‘secure’
When produces more energy than imports w/surplus
Energy mix
combination of different energy sources used to meet a country’s total energy consumption (what available most easily/ cheaply/ effectively/ securely)
Access+ consumption energy resources depend
- physical availability (geog hep rivers+ deep valleys)
- cost+ public perception (costs passed on consumer high extraction- production + different lifestyles different perceptions)
- tech+ lvl econ development (lower development lack technology+ demand develop Ghana solar)
- environ policy (cultures view differently provider or damaging)
Uk energy security (1) stats
- isn’t energy secure imports more than produces domestically
- 2010 87.5% fossil fuels
- used extract lrg reserves oil+ gas from North Sea but production peaked 1999
- 1/3 fuel import= crude oil-> 50% from Norway
- Norway 50% oil+ 60% natural gas from pipelines under North Sea+ gas= 29% UK fuel imports
- 98% liquid gas arrives by supertanker from Qatar
Uk energy security (impact) (2)
High dependence imported energy puts country at risk sudden threats such as artificial+ abrupt hikes energy prices/ supplies cut off by military campaigns/ civil unrest
Uk energy security HOWEVER (3)
- intends broaden energy mix w renewable sources especially wind+ nuclear
- 2015 renewable sources =25% electricity generation (suggesting becoming more energy secure) w largest offshore wind farm
- altho low potential energy security cos poor solar output+ HEP potential
Norway energy security HEP (1)
- energy secure doesn’t import any energy but produces domestically (atm)
- Norsk Hydro supplies 97.5% renewable electricity cos mountainous, steep valleys+ plentiful rainfall supply perfect HEP-> 40% energy mix 2010
Norway energy security fossil fuels (2)
- exploits natural gas, coal+ oil supplies 55% energy mix +exports lots 3rd largest exporter hydrocarbons+ expanding output
- profits from exports thru royalties+ taxes into sovereign wealth fund inv environ sustainable projects
Norway energy security HOWEVER (3)
- physical availability HEP= limited already over 600 HEP sites in Norsk Hydro + solar output= low
- Therefore may become less energy secure as finite resources run out
Uk energy mix coal
reduction:
- still 150yrs worth coal reserves left UK but current tech make expensive+ unrealistic use
- public concern deeper reserves coal contain high amounts sulphur which form acid rain+ sulphate aerosols= highly reflective suns rays (global warming) w/ last deep coal mine closed 2015
- environ priorities from 2015 commitment 40% reduction domestic greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 (compared 1990 lvls)
- general privatisation energy supply cos costs 1980s -> overseas CO’s e.g. Fr EDF energy decide which energy sources meet UK demand buying primary energy on int markets
- 19% reduction coal use 1980-2012
Uk energy mix nuclear power
Slight increase:
- among global leaders nuclear tech 1950s-70s but lost momentum after discovery lrg reserves N Sea oil+ gas (physical availability)
- nuclear power plants v expensive (cost)
- public perception from NIMBYISM widely seen dangerous from Chernobyl meltdown+ concern where nuclear waste stored
- only increase 3% 1980-2012 cos cheap source energy once power plants built
Norway energy mix HEP
Slight reduction:
- extremely mountainous area w steep valleys+ plentiful supply making HEP natural choice (physical availability)
- govt interventionist approach prevents foreign CO’s owning any primary energy source sites w royalties+ taxes paid by govt sale fossil fuels partly towards sovereign wealth fund w inv environ sustainable projects for future without fossil fuels (physical availability)
- environ concerns w commitment 2015 reduce 40% greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared 1990lvls + ‘Policy for change’ 2016 aiming carbon neutral by 2050
- But Norsk Hydro runs over 600 sites= supply 97.5% renewable energy means lil physical availability for expansion hydropower (physical availability)
- reduced 2.5% 1980-2010 still 40% energy mix
Norway energy mix oil
increase oil 20% 1980-2010
- partly explained by HEP lack availability
- lrg reserves oil+ other fossil fuels in countries territorial water (physical availability)
- deep water drilling tech enabling them develop North Sea oil extraction
- much oil exported 3rd largest exporter hydrocarbons + expanding output
- even tho environ concerns+ priorities still use fossil fuels predominantly from lack expansion other efficient renewable energy sources Norway as solar output limited
Wind econ cost
-high strike price £80/MwH onshore+ £115-120/Mwh offshore
Solar econ cost
- Consume productive farmland at time rising food costs e.g. Chapel Lane Solar Farm, Christchurch (UK) cost £50m +cover are= 175 football pitches, high strike price £50-80/MwH
- lack research+ development storage methods for later use
Nuclear (recyclable) econ cost
- cost building+ decommissioning high+ tech involved means only open most developed
- UK Civil Nuclear Constabulary police cost £100m/yr
Wind econ+soc benefit
Hornsea Project 1 eventually provide power million homes+ create 2000 construction jobs
Solar econ+ soc benefits
-provides energy lots homes Chapel Lane Solar Farm, Christchurch (UK) served 75% houses Bournemouth
Nuclear (recyclable) econ+Soc benefits
- one cheapest forms energy once built Fr 75% domestic energy= lowest energy bills W EU
- provides lots jobs Hinkley Point C create 25,000
Wind Soc cost
-not v attractive if near homes NIMBIYSM + noise pollution
Solar Soc cost
-takes up space e.g. Chapel Lane Solar Farm, Christchurch (UK) consuming= 175 pitches could been used homes
Nuclear (recyclable) Soc cost
- widely seen dangerous as Chernobyl meltdown released dangerous levels radiation (+Fukushima)
- threat terrorism
Solar environ cost
- Chapel Lane Solar Farm, Christchurch (UK) disrupted ecosystems+ take up lrg green space
- production+ installation =lrg carbon footprint
- reliant climate UK= low Solar output
Nuclear (recyclable) environ cost
- disposal highly toxic radioactive waste w/incredibly long decay life has no solution
- Chernobyl+ Fukushima incidents released dangerous lvls radiation
- uses huge amounts water cool reactor rods
Wind environ cost
- production (made out steel)+ installation (transported diesel trucks) =lrg carbon footprint impacting environ
- harmful to wildlife- birds Quarrendon Field, Aylesbury (UK)
Nuclear (recyclable) environ benefits
-Fr 75% domestic energy-> cleanest air SW EU
Solar environ benefits
- safe, clean+ non-polluting once made+ installed
- India huge potential
Wind environ benefits
-once production+ installation CO2 emissions extremely low
Energy pathway
-flow between producer+ consumer
