NEEC Synopsis
As previously discussed, I am in a team for the National Energy Essay Competition.
The honour of penning the synopsis has been bestowed upon me. And so I present to you the 494 words as they currently stand. I would love to hear feedback on whether they make sense, whether they capture your attention, and does it answer the essay questions, which are:
Part A (7,000 words)
Provide your prediction for the changes in primary energy demand, sourcing and facilities for electrical generation in Australia’s geographical regions supplied by the Eastern and Western electricity grids for the period 2010 through 2050
Part B (3,000 words)
Provide your view of the likely longer term energy sources, amenable to Australia for its electrical energy needs to 2100, allowing for future scientific evolution of energy production for industry and society in the context of energy changes witnessed since the industrial revolution.
Cheers.
Synopsis
Low cost energy and the need to be green: these are the two key drivers for energy in Australia and the world. However, Australia needs to look beyond the short-term hurdle of capital expenditure and make wise investments that will pay handsomely in the future.
Australia’s current reliance on gas and coal has resulted in it being the largest emitter of green house gases (GHGs) per capita. Emissions of nitrous and sulphur oxides and fine particulates mean that the cost of this generation extends to health costs, acid rain as well as climate change. Once these costs are accounted for, wind and solar technologies are not only cheaper options, but they will provide sustainable energy solutions well beyond 2100.
As the coal power plants come to the end of their design lives, replacing them with renewable alternatives such as wind and solar power plants in partnership with geosequestration will result in an 80% reliance on low emission generation.
The price of reliance on intermittent generation is the requirement for demand-side management. In times of low solar radiation and low wind speed, demand may need to be reduced by up to 15%. This can be managed through weather forecasting and the development of dynamic demand control; that is, switching off loads that do not require continuous supply.
The demand side, as well as continually improving efficiency, must be capable of coping with infrequent cuts to supply. This occurs on both the domestic and industrial market. Domestically, this requires appliances with their own thermal capacity to be capable of short-term shutdown. Industry will negotiate with the supplier regarding which loads can be cut and for how long. While on face value this appears to discourage industry and impinge on the economy, the reality is that industry has the potential to sell the right to have their power cut, or receive discounted power for this service. Energy intensive industries such as smelters already make provisions for this during times of limited generation.
Despite improvements in efficiency, Australia’s demand is predicted to more than double over the period 2010-2050, with existing electrical generators supplying 12% of that power in 2050. The new generation of electrical supply can either follow the current trend of reliance on fossil fuels or make a step change into renewable energy supply. It is that step change that will allow Australia to reduce its GHG emissions to 60% of current levels by 2100, and play its role in minimising the global climate change phenomenon.
This radical change in policy relies on technological improvements that will leave Australia as the front-runners in renewable energy technology. Those changes will cause the levels of development last seen in the era of the World Wars, minus the bloodshed. Yet Australia must act immediately with bipartisan support, outside of the traditional governmental framework, otherwise the cost will see Australian society decimated, unable to cope with a food shortfall, unsustainable fuel costs and the dirtiest air on the planet.
The honour of penning the synopsis has been bestowed upon me. And so I present to you the 494 words as they currently stand. I would love to hear feedback on whether they make sense, whether they capture your attention, and does it answer the essay questions, which are:
Part A (7,000 words)
Provide your prediction for the changes in primary energy demand, sourcing and facilities for electrical generation in Australia’s geographical regions supplied by the Eastern and Western electricity grids for the period 2010 through 2050
Part B (3,000 words)
Provide your view of the likely longer term energy sources, amenable to Australia for its electrical energy needs to 2100, allowing for future scientific evolution of energy production for industry and society in the context of energy changes witnessed since the industrial revolution.
Cheers.
Synopsis
Low cost energy and the need to be green: these are the two key drivers for energy in Australia and the world. However, Australia needs to look beyond the short-term hurdle of capital expenditure and make wise investments that will pay handsomely in the future.
Australia’s current reliance on gas and coal has resulted in it being the largest emitter of green house gases (GHGs) per capita. Emissions of nitrous and sulphur oxides and fine particulates mean that the cost of this generation extends to health costs, acid rain as well as climate change. Once these costs are accounted for, wind and solar technologies are not only cheaper options, but they will provide sustainable energy solutions well beyond 2100.
As the coal power plants come to the end of their design lives, replacing them with renewable alternatives such as wind and solar power plants in partnership with geosequestration will result in an 80% reliance on low emission generation.
The price of reliance on intermittent generation is the requirement for demand-side management. In times of low solar radiation and low wind speed, demand may need to be reduced by up to 15%. This can be managed through weather forecasting and the development of dynamic demand control; that is, switching off loads that do not require continuous supply.
The demand side, as well as continually improving efficiency, must be capable of coping with infrequent cuts to supply. This occurs on both the domestic and industrial market. Domestically, this requires appliances with their own thermal capacity to be capable of short-term shutdown. Industry will negotiate with the supplier regarding which loads can be cut and for how long. While on face value this appears to discourage industry and impinge on the economy, the reality is that industry has the potential to sell the right to have their power cut, or receive discounted power for this service. Energy intensive industries such as smelters already make provisions for this during times of limited generation.
Despite improvements in efficiency, Australia’s demand is predicted to more than double over the period 2010-2050, with existing electrical generators supplying 12% of that power in 2050. The new generation of electrical supply can either follow the current trend of reliance on fossil fuels or make a step change into renewable energy supply. It is that step change that will allow Australia to reduce its GHG emissions to 60% of current levels by 2100, and play its role in minimising the global climate change phenomenon.
This radical change in policy relies on technological improvements that will leave Australia as the front-runners in renewable energy technology. Those changes will cause the levels of development last seen in the era of the World Wars, minus the bloodshed. Yet Australia must act immediately with bipartisan support, outside of the traditional governmental framework, otherwise the cost will see Australian society decimated, unable to cope with a food shortfall, unsustainable fuel costs and the dirtiest air on the planet.
posted by BSJ-rom at 1:13 pm
5 Comments:
That's very good. I have a few minor suggestions, seeing as you asked!
In the first paragraph, perhaps make it "pay off handsomely" rather than "pay handsomely".
In the last paragraph, "Australia as a front-runner" makes more sense than "Australia as the front-runners" cos it shouldn't be plural.. I don't think.
Is "step change" a term? I'm not familiar with it.
And lastly, I wasn't sure that this sentence made sense: "The price of reliance on intermittent generation is the requirement for demand-side management." Shouldn't it be the reverse? Like, "the price of reliance on intermittent generation REQUIRES demand-side management"? I might've read it wrong..
Hope that helps! It sounds really good. You've clearly worked on it heaps. Hope you win the prize!!
You need to say 'summit' more. People love the word summit. It tends to give the impression that people are actually planning on doing stuff, without anyone having to do more than actually sit down at a summit.
You could use it as a suggestion, like "Perhaps a summit is required."
You could throw it in randomly, like "The price of energy directly summit correlates to the cost of production."
You could even slip into a southern vernacular just to use the word, like "Summit' really needs to be done about energy."
You really should say 'summit' more.
Does "pinnacle" do it for you? It looks like the work "pineapple" which is also something pretty cool and something that there should be more of.
Renae, thanks for the suggestions.
I'll use pay-off rather than pay off, so that it doesn't cost me any more words in the word count.
The last paragraph was scrapped before I got the chance to sort out my front runners.
Step change is definitely a term. Even if I did make it up (which I didn't). It means an instantaneous change. So, in digital electronics you might apply apply a step function, which means that the voltage is flat-lining at 0V, then a current is applied and there is a step change up to the applied voltage. (Ok, that description probably has some technical flaws in it, but hopefully you get the picture.) So a step change function would look like this:
^Voltage
|
| _________
| |
| |
| |
|_______| _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _> Time
Regarding your next paragraph, irrespective of what it should/shouldn't be, I think the point is that the sentence is too complicated and needs some refinement, so thanks for pointing that one out.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bugger. My graph didn't work.
Do a wiki search. It should be there.
Post a Comment
<< Home