Global Warming Endangers Energy Production in the United States and Europe
The energy supplies for the United States and Europe are at risk, thanks to increasing complications attributed to climate change. In an ironic twist of fate, the rising water temperatures and reduced river flow caused by global warming is lowering the energy output of thermoelectric power plants, such as coal-fired power plants, that require constant supplies of water for cooling purposes. In other words, the problem that some of these power plants help create is now impacting their ability to perform.
Climate Change Causing Blackouts
Extreme drops in power generation, blackouts and full or partial shutdowns of thermoelectric power plants are expected to triple over the next 50 years, according to a report in Nature Climate Change.
Reduced flow in rivers and ever increasing water temperatures decrease the cooling capabilities that nuclear and coal-fired power plants have come to rely on. While this study shines a light on the needs for better water conservation methods, it also points out how significant of a weakness thermal cooling is for our existing power grid.
The co-author of the study, Dennis Lettenmaier, a University of Washington professor of civil and environmental engineering, said “this study suggests that our reliance on thermal cooling is something that we’re going to have to revisit.”
In the summer of 2011, the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Alabama had to go offline on more than one occasion because the Tennessee River water was just too hot to provide any cooling capabilities. The study finds this was not an isolated event, in fact the findings predict that energy efficiency or power production in the U.S. will decrease 4 percent to 16 percent and even higher in Europe due to a reduction in cooling water between 2031 and 2060.
Source: Global Warming is Real (http://s.tt/1e5iY)
=================================================================
Gosh, all this extrapolated to the US and Europe from just one power plant in Tennessee that had to shut down on a hot summer day when the river had lower than usual levels. WUWT previously covered this breathtaking report of the river water temperature “crisis” and shutdown last week.
With facts like that it MUST be real. I’m reminded of this hilarious cartoon circulating the net via waznmentobe.com
I think a bigger threat to power plant shutdowns is environmental excess by the EPA, note there’s more than one power plant being closed, with a nearly 10% energy capacity drop, but somehow, that’s not a crisis to the geniuses at GlobalWarmingIsReal.com.
When the next big heat wave comes, do you think they’ll blame the EPA, or global warming for the blackouts that will surely come when the grid is stretched to capacity?
Re regional water shortages and their impact on thermal power generation: EPRI has addressed this (US Electric Power Research Institute).
http://my.epri.com/portal/server.pt?open=512&objID=370&PageID=224944&cached=true&mode=2
Note: “thermal cooling” is a shorthand for cooling of a thermal power plant, such as nuclear, oil-fired, coal-fired, and natural gas-fired.
CCGT plants use the least water per MWh, and nuclear plants use the most. (CCGT is combined cycle gas turbine ).
What powers the White House? If it’s coal the place could be taken off grid.
China is going to have a real problem, given all those coal fired power plants they are building
TheInquirer says
if anyone with even common sense read it, they would realize your agenda.
Henry says
there is no agenda here other than the reporting of true results:
there is no global warming.
It has been cooling ca 0.2 degrees K since 2000 BUT cooling will start to go faster soon
http://www.letterdash.com/henryp/global-cooling-is-here
if you have other results (that you measured / evaluated yourself) then please bring them to this forum.
As for the best method getting electrical power, see here:
http://www.letterdash.com/HenryP/fracking-for-gas-is-okok
Actually, they could probably power the full suite of normal appliances; most EVs have battery capacities ranging from 20 to 85 kWh, far more than you could use in a day unless you’re Al Gore.
+1
Brilliant! That would make a superb short video to demonstrate the logical consequences of renewablization!
Sadly, both the problem and the solution are based on false premises.
The raising of temperature due to Anthropogenic CO2 increase isn’t happening, and won’t.
And if temperatures do rise, weather will become more benign, and calmer, idling the bird choppers. (Ironically, if temperatures cool, weather will become windier and more severe, but probably damage and idle the choppers just when they’re needed most! Green really is the Color of Stupid.)
I am astunded at the scientific and enginnering ignorance of the people who debunk this study. Thermodynamics is not political. Power plants have been shutdown in Europe and US for years as the water temperatures are getting warmer in the rivers. Sea water levels rising does nothing for river water temperatures.
Drilling down into that site a bit produces some fascinating stuff, mostly about the US/NA. Start here:
http://dmsp.ngdc.noaa.gov/pres/low_light_120701/html/title.html
The wheels have come off that EPA effort, too. “Proven reserves” are the tip of the iceberg.
Sez distance from the equator, coping with colder climate, accelerated brain evolution. Where did you say Kenya was wrt the equator?
To be correct, the title has to be “Climate Change legislation and EPA mandates causing blackouts”.
[SNIP: It must be really hard to be you. Since there is nothing you like here, including your host, why do you keep coming back? When you have something substantive to contribute, try again. -REP]
So Anthony puts up a comment that suggests he believes that all utilities have to cope with due to a 0.8C global average warming is increases of only 0.8C and I question it and now I’m being censored?
Wow. Thin skinned and just a little bit hypocritical?
[If you were being censored do you think your comment would appear here? ~dbs, mod.]
@”TheInquirer” 2012/06/16 at 10:02 am
LOL!
I’m still wait for “TheInquirer” to fess up to being a shape shifter. So far he’s used (that we know of) “TheInquirer” “Exp” and “DeanL” to comment here, abandoning the latter two after being called out on multiple policy violations.
Why is that that some people critical of this blog (and me) have to be schmucks that hide behind multiple fake identities?
Besides, he has no point, he obviously doesn’t understand (or doesn’t want to) the /sarc tag.
But since he’s started to whine, I’ll make you a deal – put your real name to your words and you can say anything you want. As it stands, your comments no get troll bin status (meaning an extra moderation level) due to your multiple policy violations. Your behavior and your behavior alone is the key to changing that status. If you change into yet another false identity, you’ll be banned permanently. Be as upset as you wish.
Cheers, – Anthony
jaagu says:
June 15, 2012 at 1:23 pm
I am astunded at the scientific and enginnering ignorance of the people who debunk this study. Thermodynamics is not political. Power plants have been shutdown in Europe and US for years as the water temperatures are getting warmer in the rivers. Sea water levels rising does nothing for river water temperatures.
———–
Now that’s comedy gold, right there! Let me guess: jaagu is a teenaged green somewhere in Europe who can’t be troubled with facts or learning. Snicker.
During heat waves in US and Europe power plants have shutdown or reduced power.
Cooling towers are required in future.
Once through cooling will not work in future.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2006/jul/30/energy.weather
http://www.tva.gov/river/watersupply/
http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/southern-heat-wave-strains-power-generation/
jaagu is a retired nuclear engineering manager in the U.S, but Nolo Contendere is definetly from comedy central. He does not understand that power plants work most efficiently with cold cooling water – the Rankine cycle.
“From GlobalWarmingIsReal.com, a rather hilarious take on what that 0.8C of temperature increase in the last century is doing. Who knew the global electric grid was so fragile that it couldn’t handle such massive temperature increases? /sarc -Anthony”
===============
Anthony,
Your statement above has nothing to do with the study results. The electric grid is not the issue. Thermal power plants work on the Rankine cycle and need lots of cold water for for once through cooling. The study says these power plants need to switch to cooling towers to save water and stop heating up rivers. No effect on power plants with cooling towers already.
jaagu says:
June 16, 2012 at 7:19 pm
“From GlobalWarmingIsReal.com, a rather hilarious take on what that 0.8C of temperature increase in the last century is doing. Who knew the global electric grid was so fragile that it couldn’t handle such massive temperature increases? /sarc -Anthony”
===============
Anthony,
Your statement above has nothing to do with the study results. The electric grid is not the issue. Thermal power plants work on the Rankine cycle and need lots of cold water for for once through cooling. The study says these power plants need to switch to cooling towers to save water and stop heating up rivers. No effect on power plants with cooling towers already.
========================
jaagu, if you are truly an engineer who understands the Rankine cyle and how power plants work, then you should know an increase in cooling water temperature just increases the turbine backpressure and reduces the efficiency and power output of the turbine. It does not make you incapable of generating power or make you shut down. As others have stated, the environmental regulations require the plant to be shut down. Or the cooling water has to be at or below the design temperature to cool containment and the reator coolant system in case of an accident, again, an imposed regulation, not a technical limit on the ability to produce power when water temperatures are high. And you are correct that any new or existing plants with cooling towers with proper design will feel little impact from an 0.8 increase in average temperature, this is because the increase is mostly at night. So the premise of the article is a tempest in a teapot. The Browns Ferry issue? Weather interpreted as climate, where have we seen that before?
So the premise of the article is a tempest in a teapot.
==================
oeman50, so are you saying that cooling towers are not required for existing and future power plants located on rivers in SE US and Europe? The study shows that once through cooling will heat up those rivers and use too much river water? Once through cooling is no longer realistic on those rivers.
Thanks for trying to tell me what I already know about Rankine cycle and cooling of nuclear power plants.
jaagu says:
June 17, 2012 at 10:31 pm
So the premise of the article is a tempest in a teapot.
oeman50, so are you saying that cooling towers are not required for existing and future power plants located on rivers in SE US and Europe? The study shows that once through cooling will heat up those rivers and use too much river water? Once through cooling is no longer realistic on those rivers.
Thanks for trying to tell me what I already know about Rankine cycle and cooling of nuclear power plants.
=================================
jaagu, I am not trying to be pedantic, But you said, “Your statement above has nothing to do with the study results. The electric grid is not the issue.” I beg to differ. The article says, “Climate Change Causing Blackouts. Extreme drops in power generation, blackouts and full or partial shutdowns of thermoelectric power plants are expected to triple over the next 50 years, according to a report in Nature Climate Change.” Typical scare tactics.
I was merely trying to point out that the effects on power generation are self-imposed, not technical. Browns Ferry shuts down due to environmental regulations on heat rejection, see article link below.
http://cleantechnica.com/2011/08/09/90-degree-river-shuts-tennessee-nuclear-plant-for-second-time/
And yes, I am saying that cooling towers are not federally required for existing power plants in the US, don’t know about Europe. New plants, yes, existing plants with once through cooling, no. At least one state, California, passed a law requiring closed cycle cooling in the future, but that is not in the SE.
oeman50, In 50 years the study shows river flows decreasing and temperatures rising. When a river gets too low it may uncover the intake structure and cooling water suction to a point where the plants must be shutdown. Power plants with once through cooling may also impact other power plants on the same river by using up too much water – downstream power plants may not have adequate water even for their cooling towers. So I disagree with you on existing power plants on smaller rivers. Some of them will need to backfit cooling towers.
If you would stop thinking that the study is political or scare tactics, then you could admit that there is a potential problem for some power plants.
Climate change also led to the creation of pod people who took over science and fired anyone that got in the way and pursued more blacklisting than anything done in Hollywood.
jaagu says:
June 18, 2012 at 11:54 pm
oeman50, In 50 years the study shows river flows decreasing and temperatures rising. When a river gets too low it may uncover the intake structure and cooling water suction to a point where the plants must be shutdown. Power plants with once through cooling may also impact other power plants on the same river by using up too much water – downstream power plants may not have adequate water even for their cooling towers. So I disagree with you on existing power plants on smaller rivers. Some of them will need to backfit cooling towers.
If you would stop thinking that the study is political or scare tactics, then you could admit that there is a potential problem for some power plants.
===================================
OK, one more time, then I’m done. The reduced river flows projected for 50 years hence are pulled from climate models that have not been proven to be accurate at forward prediction [scare tactic]. None of the shutdowns at Browns Ferry cited as the horrible example [scare tactic] were caused by uncovering the intake pump suctions, the plant was technically still capable of generating power. And power plants with once through cooling actually use less water than a cooling tower, the evaporation rate of the water that is all returned to the river is approximately one third of the amount for a cooling tower because you are not using it for evaporative cooling. I agree that power plants on smaller rivers may need to retrofit towers if the water sometimes gets too hot. But that is small subset of plants with once-through cooling and is not a sudden issue that will cause the grid to come crashing down as alleged in the article [scare tactic].
oeman50 says: …once-through cooling and is not a sudden issue that will cause the grid to come crashing down as alleged in the article [scare tactic].
===============
The study never said that the grid would come crashing down. That is your scare tactic against the study. Read the original study as published:
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1546.html
I disagree with with your baseless denial of forward looking climate models.
I am sure you would agree that natural gas fired power plants are they way to proceed as the use less cooling water, they are cheapest for of thermal/nuclear electrical energy generation, and they have the least environmental impact.