CO2 Terra Viridis Domus Efféctus | Terra Clima Mutationem | Earth Green House Effect | Earth Climate Change | Mundo Efeito Estufa | Mundo Mudança Climática | 地球溫室效應 | 地球氣候變化 | Effet de Serre de La Terre | Le Changement Climatique de La Terre | Terra Effetto Serra | Cambiamenti Climatici Della Terra ------ αποκάλυψη
Scientists’ warnings that the rise of the sea would
eventually imperil the United States’ coastline are no
By JUSTIN GILLISSEPT. 3, 2016. (NYtimes)
A house in Norfolk, Va., that has been repeatedly hit by tidal floods sat on temporary supports as workers prepared to elevate it permanently in June.
Credit Eliot Dudik for The New York Times
NORFOLK, Va. — Huge vertical rulers are sprouting beside low spots in the streets here, so people can judge if the tidal floods that increasingly inundate their roads are too deep to drive through.
Five hundred miles down the Atlantic Coast, the only road to Tybee Island, Ga., is disappearing beneath the sea several times a year, cutting the town off from the mainland.
And another 500 miles on, in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., increased tidal flooding is forcing the city to spend millions fixing battered roads and drains — and, at times, to send out giant vacuum trucks to suck saltwater off the streets.
For decades, as the global warming created by human emissions caused land ice to melt and ocean water to expand, scientists warned that the accelerating rise of the sea would eventually imperil the United States’ coastline.
Now, those warnings are no longer theoretical: The inundation of the coast has begun. The sea has crept up to the point that a high tide and a brisk wind are all it takes to send water pouring into streets and homes.
Federal scientists have documented a sharp jump in this nuisance flooding — often called “sunny-day flooding” — along both the East Coast and the Gulf Coast in recent years. The sea is now so near the brim in many places that they believe the problem is likely to worsen quickly. Shifts in the Pacific Ocean mean that the West Coast, partly spared over the past two decades, may be hit hard, too.
These tidal floods are often just a foot or two deep, but they can stop traffic, swamp basements, damage cars, kill lawns and forests, and poison wells with salt. Moreover, the high seas interfere with the drainage of storm water.
In coastal regions, that compounds the damage from the increasingly heavy rains plaguing the country, like those that recently caused extensive flooding in Louisiana. Scientists say these rains are also a consequence of human greenhouse emissions.
“Once impacts become noticeable, they’re going to be upon you quickly,” said William V. Sweet, a scientist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in Silver Spring, Md., who is among the leaders in research on coastal inundation. “It’s not a hundred years off — it’s now.”
Local governments, under pressure from annoyed citizens, are beginning to act. Elections are being won on promises to invest money to protect against flooding. Miami Beach is leading the way, increasing local fees to finance a $400 million plan that includes raising streets, installing pumps and elevating sea walls.
In many of the worst-hit cities, mayors of both parties are sounding an alarm.
“I’m a Republican, but I also realize, by any objective analysis, the sea level is rising,” said Jason Buelterman, the mayor of tiny Tybee Island, one of the first Georgia communities to adopt a detailed climate plan.
But the local leaders say they cannot tackle this problem alone. They are pleading with state and federal governments for guidance and help, including billions to pay for flood walls, pumps and road improvements that would buy them time.
Yet Congress has largely ignored these pleas, and has even tried to block plans by the military to head off future problems at the numerous bases imperiled by a rising sea. A Republican congressman from Colorado, Ken Buck, recently called one military proposal part of a “radical climate change agenda.”
The gridlock in Washington means the United States lacks not only a broad national policy on sea-level rise, it has something close to the opposite: The federal government spends billions of taxpayer dollars in ways that add to the risks, by subsidizing local governments and homeowners who build in imperiled locations along the coast.
As the problem worsens, experts are warning that national security is on the line. Naval bases, in particular, are threatened; they can hardly be moved away from the ocean, yet much of their land is at risk of disappearing within this century.
“It’s as if the country was being attacked along every border, simultaneously,” said Andrea Dutton, a climate scientist at the University of Florida and one of the world’s leading experts on rising seas. “It’s a slow, gradual attack, but it threatens the safety and security of the United States.”
‘We’re Living It’
One night eight years ago, Karen Speights, a Norfolk resident, was sitting at the dinner table with her mother, eating crab legs dipped in butter and a tangy sauce. She felt a tingle.
“Ma!” she cried. “My feet are wet!”
Her mother laughed, but then she felt it, too: a house that had not flooded since the family moved there in 1964 was soon awash in saltwater. Ms. Speights initially hoped that flood was a fluke. Instead, it turned out to be the first of three to hit their home in less than a decade.
“I believe it because we’re living it,” Ms. Speights said as she sat on her sofa, nodding toward the nearby tidal marsh that sent water into her living room. “The water has to be rising if we never flooded, and all of a sudden we’ve flooded three times in eight years.”
Because the land is sinking as the ocean rises, Norfolk and the metropolitan region surrounding it, known as Hampton Roads, are among the worst-hit parts of the United States. That local factor means, in essence, that the region is a few decades ahead in feeling the effects of sea-level rise, and illustrates what people along the rest of the American coast can expect.
The biggest problems involve frequent flooding of homes and roads. As the sea rises, hundreds of tidal creeks and marshes that thread through the region are bringing saltwater to people’s doorsteps.
This summer, on a driving tour of Norfolk and nearby towns, William A. Stiles Jr. pointed to the telltale signs that the ocean is gradually invading the region.
He spotted crusts of dried salt in the streets, and salt-loving marsh grasses that are taking over suburban yards. He pointed out trees killed by seawater. He stood next to one of the road signs that Norfolk has been forced to install in recent years, essentially huge vertical rulers so people know the depth of floodwaters at low-lying intersections.
“There’s just more and more visible impacts: water on the street, water that won’t clear from the ditch, these intense rain events, higher tides,” Mr. Stiles said.
“It’s beginning to catch the attention of citizens, restaurant owners, business people, politicians. There’s just much more of a conversation, and it’s not just in the politically safe places. It’s everywhere.”
Mr. Stiles, known as Skip, heads a local environmental group, Wetlands Watch. At his suggestion, students at two local universities began looking at the neighborhood where Ms. Speights lives, Chesterfield Heights. It has had little history of flooding, but that is starting to change as the water rises.
The plan the students developed has morphed into an ambitious program to safeguard the neighborhood, and another nearby, for decades. The Obama administration recently gave Virginia more than $100 million to carry the plan out. The administration has also enlisted one of the universities, Old Dominion in Norfolk, to spearhead a broad effort at better planning.
But the size of that grant illustrates the scope of the problem confronting the region, and the country: protecting a single neighborhood from rising water can easily cost tens of millions of dollars. Sea walls and streets may have to be raised, or movable gates built along waterways so they can be closed at times of high water.
While the Obama administration is trying to create a few showcase neighborhoods, there is no sign Congress is prepared to spend the money that cities and states say they need: tens of billions of dollars just to catch up to the current flooding problems, much less get ahead of them. Norfolk alone, a town of 250,000 people, has a wish list of $1.2 billion — or about $5,000 for every man, woman and child in the city.
As the national response lags, experts warn that the flooding is putting the country’s defense at risk.
Several studies have concluded that Naval Station Norfolk, the world’s largest naval base, is profoundly threatened by rising seas, as are other coastal bases.
The Pentagon has managed to build floodgates and other protective measures at some facilities. But attempts by the military to develop broader climate change plans have met fierce resistance in Congress.
That was the case this summer, when an effort by the Pentagon to appoint officers to take charge of climate resilience led to a House vote prohibiting taxpayer money from being spent on the plan.
Andrea Dutton, a University of Florida climate scientist, beside an ancient coral reef in the Florida Keys, evidence that the sea level was once far higher than today.
Credit Joshua Bright for The New York Times
“When we distract our military with a radical climate change agenda, we detract from their main purpose of defending America from enemies” like the Islamic State, said Mr. Buck of Colorado, the Republican congressman who sponsored the measure. His amendment passed the House 216 to 205, though the Senate has yet to agree to it.
Many people in Congress, almost all of them Republicans, express doubt about climate science, with some of them promulgating conspiracy theories claiming that researchers have invented the issue to justify greater governmental control over people’s lives. So far, this ideological position has been immune to the rising evidence of harm from human-induced climate change.
The Obama administration has been pushing federal agencies, including the Pentagon, to take more aggressive steps. But without action in Congress, experts say these efforts fall far short of what is required.
“In the country, certainly in the Congress, it hasn’t really resonated — the billions and perhaps trillions of dollars that we would need to spend if we want to live on the coast like we’re living today,” said David W. Titley, a retired rear admiral who was the chief oceanographer of the Navy, and now heads a climate center at Pennsylvania State University.
“I haven’t seen any evidence that there is serious thought about this: What does a world of three, four, five feet of sea-level rise look like?”
Deep in a thicket of trees on an out-of-the-way island in the Florida Keys, a diesel engine roared to life. Soon a drill bit was chewing through ancient limestone, pulling up evidence from the geological past that might shed light on the future of the planet.
On a sultry day in March, Dr. Dutton, the University of Florida scientist, stood watch over the drilling operation, inspecting her samples as they emerged from the ground. She spotted fossilized corals, proof that what is now the dry ground of Lignumvitae Key was once underwater.
With taxpayer funding from the National Science Foundation, Dr. Dutton is chasing what might be the most urgent question in climate science: How fast is the ocean going to rise?
“Is it going to happen in decades, or centuries, or a thousand years?” Dr. Dutton asked as she took a break to eat lunch on a tarpaulin spread under the trees. “This will give us an example to say, ‘Well, the last time this happened, here is how long it took.’”
The opponents of climate science in Congress, and the tiny group of climate researchers allied with them, have argued that the concerns of thousands of mainstream scientists about the future are based on unproven computer forecasts.
In reality, their concerns are based in large part on mounting evidence of what has happened in the past.
Water from a tidal stretch of the Potomac River flooded Old Town Alexandria in Virginia during high tides in early June. Credit Gabriella Demczuk for The New York Times
Through decades of research, it has become clear that human civilization, roughly 6,000 years old, developed during an unusually stable period for global sea levels. But over longer spans, coastlines have been much more dynamic.
During ice ages, caused by wobbles in the Earth’s orbit, sea levels dropped more than 400 feet as ice piled up on land. But during periods slightly warmer than today, the sea may have risen 70 or more feet above the current level.
Dr. Dutton and other leading scientists are focused on the last sea-level high point, which occurred between the last two ice ages, about 125,000 years ago.
After years of surveying ancient shorelines around the world, scientists determined that the sea level rose by something like 20 to 30 feet in that era, compared with today. But how long did it take to make that jump? That is the question Dr. Dutton, using improved research techniques, wants to answer.
Large parts of the Florida Keys are simply ancient coral reefs that grew during the period of high seas, and were exposed when the levels fell. Trees, roads and houses now sit atop the old reefs. By recovering samples, Dr. Dutton hopes to date a sequence of corals as they grew along with the rising sea, potentially revealing the rate at which the water rose.
The research, likely to take years, may supply a figure for how quickly the ocean was able to rise under past conditions, but not necessarily a maximum rate for the coming decades. The release of greenhouse gases from human activity is causing the planet to warm rapidly, perhaps faster than at any other time in the Earth’s history. The ice sheets in both Greenland and West Antarctica are beginning to melt into the sea at an accelerating pace.
Scientists had long hoped that any disintegration of the ice sheets would take thousands of years, but recent research suggests the breakup of West Antarctica could occur much faster. In the worst-case scenario, this research suggests, the rate of sea-level rise could reach a foot per decade by the 22nd century, about 10 times faster than today.
In 2013, scientists reached a consensus that three feet was the highest plausible rise by the year 2100. But now some of them are starting to say that six or seven feet may be possible. A rise that large over a span of decades would be an unparalleled national catastrophe, driving millions of people from their homes and most likely requiring the abandonment of entire cities.
In essence, by revealing how sensitive the ice sheets have been to past warming, Dr. Dutton’s research may answer the question of whether such a rapid jump is possible.
Along those parts of the United States coast that are sinking at a brisk clip, including southern Louisiana and the entire Chesapeake Bay region, including Norfolk, the situation will be worse than average. On the Pacific Coast, a climate pattern that had pushed billions of gallons of water toward Asia is now ending, so that in coming decades the sea is likely to rise quickly off states like Oregon and California.
Along the East Coast, scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration say that many communities have already, or will soon, pass a threshold where sunny-day flooding starts to happen much more often.
Highway 80, the only road to Tybee Island, Ga., in June. High tides are forcing the road to close several times a year. Credit Stephen B. Morton for The New York Times
At the City Market in Charleston, S.C., one of the most popular spots in town, shoppers dodged seawater that bubbled up from storm drains during high tide in June.
CreditHunter McRae for The New York Times
“When you look at the historical record, there’s no trend saying the flooding is going down,” said Dr. Sweet, the NOAA expert. “The trends are all very clear. They’re going up, and they’re going up in many of these areas in an accelerating fashion.”
Late last year, in Paris, nations reached a landmark global agreement to cut emissions. It is fragile, and might not survive if Donald J. Trump is elected president in November; he has pledged to scrap it.
But the air is already so full of greenhouse gases that most land ice on the planet has started to melt. So even if the deal survives, it will, at best, slow the rise of the sea and perhaps limit the ultimate increase. Many climate scientists, including Dr. Dutton, believe a rise of at least 15 or 20 feet has already become inevitable, over an unknown period.
Facing Hard Decisions
As Brad Tuckman walked the piece of land in Fort Lauderdale where he is building a grand new house, he pointed toward the canal that wraps around three sides of the property.
It is scenic, with yachts plying the water, yet as the sea has risen, street flooding in the area has become a recurring nuisance. So before starting construction, Mr. Tuckman said he spent nearly a half-million dollars to raise the sea wall and truck in dirt to elevate the land.
“The predictions of what’s going to happen over the next 20, 30, 40 years — it’s real,” said Mr. Tuckman, the founder of a company offering creative services to the retail industry.
In South Florida, among the worst-hit parts of the country for sunny-day flooding, people are not waiting for state or federal help. Those who can afford it are starting to act on their own. A company, Coastal Risk Consulting, has cropped up to advise them, and is offering its services nationally.
Cities and counties in the region have formed an alliance and enlisted professors to help them figure out what to do. They are hiring “chief resilience officers,” an idea pioneered by the Rockefeller Foundation in New York, which is paying some of the salary cost.
In Miami Beach and Fort Lauderdale, as well as in older Northern cities like Boston and New York, tidal marshes and creeks were filled in a century or more ago to make new land, and it is in these areas — “back bays,” as some of these spots are called — where the flooding is happening first.
That is because they remain the lowest spots in the landscape, vulnerable to the rising water nearby. Old drain pipes empty into the tidal creeks, and at high tide the water can back up through these pipes, bubbling into the streets seemingly from nowhere.
In Miami Beach, the city engineer, Bruce A. Mowry, has come up with a plan for combating the flooding. He rips up problematic streets, raises them with extra dirt and repaves them, installing new drains and giant pumps that can push water back into the bay. The approach has already been shown to work in several neighborhoods.
A University of Florida scientific team approaching Lignumvitae Key as part of a study to determine how fast sea levels rose in the ancient past.
Credit Joshua Bright for The New York Times
A controversy has erupted about whether Miami Beach is polluting Biscayne Bay with the water, but the city is pushing ahead. Miami Beach plans to spend at least $400 million on its plan by 2018, raising the money through fees imposed on homes and businesses.
The huge county government for the region, Miami-Dade County, is developing its own resilience strategy, one likely to cost billions. It has committed to rebuilding some of its decaying infrastructure, like a sewage plant, in a way that safeguards against sea-level rise and storm surges.
“I don’t see doom and gloom here; I see opportunity,” said Harvey Ruvin, the clerk of courts for Miami-Dade County, who has been a leading voice on the environment in Florida for a half-century, and who recently led a county task force on sea-level rise. “We’re talking about the most robust possible jobs program you can think of, and one that can’t be outsourced.”
Many of the Republican mayors in the region are on the same page as Democrats in requesting national and state action on climate change, as well as pushing local steps. James C. Cason, the Republican mayor of Coral Gables, has convened informational sessions that draw hundreds of residents, and he has received no complaints for his stance.
“I hope in coming years when we have to spend a lot of money, the citizens will still support it,” Mr. Cason said in an interview.
Still, his city, and others in South Florida, have some hard decisions to make.
Some property owners cannot afford to raise their sea walls, putting their neighborhoods at increased risk of flooding. Will they be held legally responsible when floods do occur? A strict policy could force some people from their homes. Conversely, should public money be spent to do the work, even if it largely benefits private property?
Just for streets, storm drains and the like, South Florida governments will need to raise billions, and they have yet to figure out how. Moreover, if the rise of the sea accelerates as much as some scientists fear, it is doubtful the cities will be able to keep up.
The region has one mayor, Philip K. Stoddard of South Miami, who is a scientist himself — he studies animal communication at Florida International University — and has been a close reader of scientific papers about climate change since the 1990s.
“I remember lying in bed at night thinking, ‘I hope this isn’t real,’” Dr. Stoddard, a Democrat, recalled. “I hope other data comes in that contradicts it. It took me several years to get my head around it and say, ‘Oh, God, it is real.’”
Now he is focused on easing the pain for South Miami, with a $50 million system of sewer pipes to replace septic tanks threatened by the rising water table.
“You can play it really badly and let unpleasant things happen earlier,” he said. “Or you can push them off by doing some infrastructure repairs and some thoughtful planning.”
He is, though, under no illusions about the long-term fate of the region he calls home.
“We’re putting enough heat in the ocean to send water over us, no question,” Dr. Stoddard said. “Ultimately, we give up and we leave. That’s how the story ends.”
A word to the burly coal miners who complainedthat cutting coal out of our energy mix would take away their jobs when the Climate Action Plan was up for debate. Jobs in solar energy now outnumber jobs in coal mining and the oil and gas industry added together, says anew reportfrom the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA).
Solar may be taking away old jobs, but it’s offering new ones. That’s especially true for women. IRENA found that the renewable energy sector employs more women than oil, gas, and coal. In fact, the percentage of women working in solar is rising — up from 19 percent in 2013 to 24 percent of the estimated 209,000 solar jobs in the United States. That’s not yet great — women hold 47 percent of the jobs in our economy. But it’s still a higher percentage than in the bro-topia that is the conventional energy industry.
Worldwide, employment in green energy grew 5 percent in 2015, to 8.1 million jobs, while the slump in oil prices that began in the fall of 2015 eliminated an estimated 350,000 oil jobs across the planet.
Around the world, the solar industry was the largest renewable energy employer — jobs increased 11 percent between 2014 and 2015, to 2.8 million jobs. Most of those jobs — 1.7 million — are in China, because that’s where most solar panels are manufactured. In the European Union, a decline in manufacturing means that the region lost jobs, but high rates of solar installation in the United States kept solar employment high.
One of the most interesting markets for solar is in countries with unstable electrical grids, such as Bangladesh, India, and Kenya. It’s possible that those countries will be at the forefront of adopting small, independent solar systems, in much the same way that Egypt and other countries without widespread telephone access were early cellphone adopters. In North Korea, small, personal solar panels are on the rise, bought by people who need to charge cellphones when the grid goes down.
Both the United States and the European Union have accused China of selling solar panels at below-market value in order to drive solar manufacturing in other countries out of business, and have put hefty import tariffs on Chinese solar panels. In response, Chinese manufacturers have globalized their solar operations, setting up solar panel factories in other countries like Malaysia, Thailand, India, Brazil, and the United States.
So, good news. IRENA estimates that if nations follow through on the climate pledges made in Paris last year, this upswing is only going to continue. Their estimate? Jobs in renewable energy will triple to 24 million by 2030.
Energia eólica: hoje, os parques em operação na região são responsáveis pelo abastecimento de boa parte da população local de 56 milhões de pessoas.
O vento forte que não para de soprar fez da pequena Icaraí de Amontada, na costa oeste do Ceará, uma ilha de usinas eólicas. Elas geram energia elétricausando a força dos ventos.
Ali, para qualquer lado que se olhe, modernas e gigantescas torres de quase 150 metros de altura - do tamanho de um prédio de 42 andares - destoam do cenário rústico da antiga vila de pescadores, com suas dunas, praias e lagoas. Reduto de atletas estrangeiros praticantes de kitesurf e windsurf, a comunidade, de 2,4 mil habitantes, entrou para a lista dos melhores ventos do Brasil e ajudou a elevar a participação da energia eólica para mais de 30% do consumo do Nordeste.
Os parques instalados na região de Amontada estão entre os mais eficientes do planeta. Enquanto no mundo, as usinas eólicas produzem, em média, 25% da capacidade anual, no Complexo de Icaraí esse porcentual é mais que o dobro.
As 31 torres que compõem o parque produzem 56% da capacidade anual. Para ter ideia do que isso significa, nos Estados Unidos, esse indicador é de 32,1%; e na Alemanha, uma das maiores potências eólicas do mundo, de 18,5%. "O vento noNordeste é muito diferenciado", afirma Luciano Freire, diretor de engenharia da Queiroz Galvão Energia, dona do complexo eólico de Icaraí.
É por causa da qualidade desse vento - forte e constante - que o Nordeste despontou como uma das maiores fronteiras eólica do mundo. Hoje, os parques em operação na região são responsáveis pelo abastecimento de boa parte da população local de 56 milhões de pessoas.
Não é difícil entender a rápida expansão das eólicas no Brasil. Em 2008, com a crise internacional, o consumo mundial de energia despencou, paralisou uma série de projetos e deixou as fábricas ociosas. Em busca de demanda, elas desembarcaram no Brasil - onde o uso da energia crescia a taxas de dois dígitos - e derrubou o preço das eólicas, até então caras por aqui. A partir de 2009, com leilões dedicados à essa fonte de energia, os investimentos decolaram. De lá pra cá, o setor recebeu R$ 67 bilhões, segundo dados da Associação Brasileira de Energia Eólica (Abeeólica).
Esse montante colocou o País na 10ª posição entre as nações com maior capacidade instalada do mundo. Foi um grande avanço. Até 2008, a potência do parque eólico brasileiro era de 27 megawatts (MW). No mês passado, alcançou a marca de 9,7 mil MW, volume suficiente para abastecer mais de 45 milhões de habitantes. No total, são 5.141 turbinas instaladas Brasil afora. Cerca de 82% delas estão no Nordeste.
Os moradores de Icaraí de Amontada ainda se fazem algumas perguntas. Questionam o impacto que as usinas podem causar à região no decorrer dos anos e não entendem por que continuam pagando uma conta de luz tão alta se os parques eólicos estão praticamente no seu quintal. "Deveríamos ter energia elétrica de graça", afirma Raimunda Alves dos Santos, que paga R$ 180 por mês de luz.
Entre os moradores, essa é uma reclamação recorrente. É difícil compreender por que uma energia produzida com o vento - que é de graça - pode ser tão cara. Se eles fizessem essa pergunta às empresas geradoras, teriam como resposta uma explicação complexa, que envolve toda a estrutura do setor. "O Brasil funciona como um sistema único, a precificação é nacional e não regional", diz a presidente da Associação Brasileira de Energia Eólica (Abeeólica), Elbia Gannoum.
Em outras palavras, significa dizer que todos os custos do setor são divididos entre todos os consumidores do País. Para a eólica começar a fazer diferença na conta de luz dos nordestinos, é necessário que ela ganhe participação não só na região, mas em todo o País.
Com alguns raros projetos de Pequenas Centrais Hidrelétricas (PCH) em desenvolvimento no Estado de Pernambuco e sem potencial para grandes hidrelétricas, a vocação do Nordeste tem se inclinado cada vez mais para a energia eólica. Segundo Elbia Gannoum, até 2020, a participação da energia do vento na matriz elétrica brasileira vai saltar dos atuais 6% para 20% da capacidade instalada. No Nordeste, essa participação será ainda maior, de 30%. Em termos de consumo, a fonte será capaz de atender cerca de 70% da carga da região em alguns momentos do dia.
Nos próximos três anos, diz Elbia, o volume de investimentos em novos parques será de R$ 40,8 bilhões. Ela destaca que cada megawatt de eólica instalado cria 15 postos de trabalho em toda cadeia produtiva, desde o canteiro de obras até a fabricação de pás, aerogeradores e torres. Seguindo o cálculo da Abeeólica e considerando que entre 2017 e 2019 estão previstos mais 6,8 mil MW de potência, o setor pode gerar 102 mil postos de trabalho.
As informações são do jornal O Estado de S. Paulo.
They like to do things
big in Dubai, including a newly-approved concentrated solar power project that
will generate 1,000 megawatts of power by 2020—and a whopping 5,000 megawatts
The Dubai Water and Electricity Authority (DEWA)
has announced the launch of the world’s largest concentrated solar power (CSP)
project. Located on a single site within the Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum
Solar Park, the plant will consist of five facilities. The first phase of the
project is expected to be completed either in late 2020 or 2021, at which timeit’s
expected to generate 1,000 MW of power. By 2030, this plant could be churning
out five times that amount—enough to raise the emirate’s total power output by
Concentrated solar power plants, unlike solar energy drawn from
photovoltaic cells, use a large array of mirrors (called heliostats) to
concentrate a large area of sunlight onto a small area, typically on top of a
tower. Electricity is generated when the concentrated light gets converted to
heat, which drives a steam turbine connected to an electrical power generator.
An advantage of CSP is that thermal heat can be stored easily, making it
possible to produce electricity after sunset.
The Dubai plant will have several thousand heliostats located around a
tower. The resulting heat-transfer fluid will power a steam turbine to generate
electricity. Incredibly, the new plant will deliver power at less than 8 cents
per kilowatt-hour, down from the typical 15 kilowatt-hour rate. Once complete,
the solar park is expected to reduce 6.5 million tons of carbon emissions each
year. A typical coal plant produces around 3.5 million tons of CO2 per year.
The new plant is part
of Dubai’s Clean Energy Strategy 2050, which will see the emirate generate
seven percent of its total power from clean energy by 2020, followed by 25
percent in 2030, and 75 percent by 2050.
The UK’s solar panels generated more electricity than coal in May 2016, the first-ever calendar month to pass the milestone, Carbon Brief analysis shows.
Solar generated an estimated 1,336 gigawatt hours (GWh) of electricity in May, 50% more than the 893GWh output from coal. The finding follows on from Carbon Brief’searlier analysis showing solar beating coal for the first full day on 9 April 2016, and for the first week from 3 May 2016.
While these milestones are largely symbolic, they do highlight the major changes going on in the UK electricity system. For further context, analysis and data details see the previous coverage from Carbon Brief.
UK monthly electricity from solar and coal
The chart below shows that solar generated 50% more electricity than coal during May 2016. This was due to a combination of low coal output and the impact of longer days as summer approaches.
Total electricity generation from UK solar and coal during the calendar months April and May 2016, gigawatt hours (GWh). Sources: Sheffield Solar and Gridwatch. Chart by Carbon Brief.
Solar and coal shares of UK total
Solar generated nearly 6% of the UK’s electricity needs during May, against less than 4% for coal (see note below for details of this calculations). In January, the figures were just 1% for solar and 17% for coal.
There has been a huge reduction in coal-fired power generation in the UK since the start of 2016, as the chart below shows. Nearly a quarter of electricity generation in 2015 was from coal but since the, power market economics have shifted in favour of gas and several coal plants have opted to close.
Shares of total UK electricity generation met by solar and coal during January to May 2016 (%). Sources: Sheffield Solar andGridwatch. Chart by Carbon Brief.
UK weekly electricity from solar and coal
Solar has generated more electricity than coal in each of the past five weeks. Note that coal generation increased around the start of June as a result of low wind power output.
Total electricity generation from UK solar and coal during each week between 1 April 2016 and 2 June 2016, gigawatt hours (GWh). Sources: Sheffield Solar and Gridwatch. Chart by Carbon Brief.
UK daily electricity from solar and coal
Although solar has cumulatively outpaced coal in each week since the end of April, coal has topped solar on some days in May, as the chart below shows.
The UK passed a historic milestone in mid-May as coal output hit zero on seven periods across the week commencing Monday 9 May. Total daily coal output was near zero during 12-14 May. The zero-coal periods were reported by the Financial Times, thePress Association, the Telegraph and others, citing Carbon Brief analysis.
Total electricity generation from UK solar and coal on each day between 1 April 2016 and 6 June 2016, gigawatt hours (GWh). Sources: Sheffield Solar and Gridwatch. Chart by Carbon Brief.
Notes: The figures for shares of total UK electricity generation are estimates. They only include solar generation and other forms of generation that are connected to the transmission grid network. Embedded generation from wind or other sources is not centrally metered and data is not available. However, this missing data will not alter the relative positions of solar and coal generation.