Where Will The Energy Come From?

Oil, Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Wind, Solar Energy? The world’s energy appetite will at least double by the end of this century (some claim it will triple). If we attempt to meet this burgeoning global demand exclusively with fossil fuels, the environmental consequences are difficult to predict. We are products of a world where energy was long assumed to be cheap, unlimited and readily available. Today, all three assumptions are in question.

In a few short years, the problem of energy has emerged as one of the defining—and most difficult—challenges of the 21st century.

Economic activity is clearly the single most important driver of the energy demand of a country. This demand does change as countries gradually shift from more energy-intense manufacturing industries to service activities or when technological advances make energy use more efficient – but these processes take time and with oil reaching all time highs the effects are already being felt.

Oil; Countries with a high dependency on oil are already suffering higher relative inflation against their peers which will subsequently damage their exports. Spain, Greece or Belgium are already suffering from inflation above the average Euro zone inflation of 3.3%, already way above the 2% untries nuclear and alternatives seem to be the most viable energy sources in the not so distant targeted by the ECB. What alternatives do we have in Europe other than oil?

Coal, the main source of energy in both China and India, is cheaper to extract compared to oil and gas but is highly polluting. Although, vast reserves are still available, rail and harbour bottlenecks, as well as a sharp increase in demand is making supply fall behind.

Read

The price of coal from South Africa, the main exporter to European utility companies, has increased by 20% so far this year. Besides, in the short term, South Africa may limit exports to avoid power supply crises like they suffered in late January when some mining houses were ordered to stop mining to avoid blackouts. These would have large implications as it is one of the main producers together with Australia and Indonesia.

For the longer term, enforcing the Kyoto agreement should end up curbing demand of coal, at least, on the treaty signing countries like Germany, where more than 20% of energy demand is still coming from coal.

Natural Gas produces the least carbon dioxide of the fossil fuels, which makes it very attractive for the production of electricity by power companies in Europe. Its demand has grown steadily outside its traditional use for heating and it is already a major source of energyfor the UK, Italy and Germany. Most of the gas coming into Europe flows from Russia (providing Germany), Norway (the UK’s main provider) and Algeria which through its two main pipes, supplies the Iberian Peninsula and Italy, too. However, diameter, operating pressure, length of the current pipes, as well as the limited number of storage facilities available limit supply – which has not been able to keep up with demand. The price of natural gas coming in to the UK has gone up by 130% in the last 12 months.

Nuclear seems to be the medium term solution which some European countries like the UK or Italy are willing to pursue. Italy has recently announced it will go back to nuclear energy after 20 years as it will allow them “the production of clean energy, at low cost, on a large scale and without damaging the environment”. However, nuclear energy still generates safety concerns and challenging problems related to the disposal of its radioactive waste.

Countries like France, Sweden, and some of the former Soviet Union allies already rely heavily on nuclear energy. Within renewable energies Hydropower is by far the largest source of energy. It generates no carbon dioxide and produces electricity less expensively than energy coming from both fossil fuel and nuclear. However, supply depends on water reserves and the topography and weather of countries and while it is a major source in Austria and Norway it is less of an option for countries like the UK.

Other alternative sources like Wind or Solar Energy
– although growing very rapidly in countries like Germany and Spain – are still heavily dependent on state subsidies and the deployment of improved technologies. In the medium term, these alternative sources are, however, set to play an important role with the European Commission targeting 20% of energy coming from wind, wave and solar sources by 2020.

Overall, cheaper access to energy will be a large competitive advantage for some European countries. Countries like France, Norway and even the UK stand out to be in a much better position than Spain, Italy or Ireland, which are yet not on track to fulfill their part of the Kyoto agreement. This rules out coal as an alternative for these countries which will likely increase their dependency on gas in the short term, but there are some risks as Algeria is the main provider for both Italy and Spain.

For these countries nuclear and alternatives seem to be the most viable energy sources in the not so distant future.

You may also like...

5 Responses

  1. rosalie says:

    Of all the sources of energy, the solar and wind energy is the safest and most abundant of all..
    We have to conserve not tomorrow but at this moment… asap

  2. Thom says:

    Fusion.

  3. Blazin' Blue says:

    Alternative energy is the next Big Thing in resources, though a lot don’t realize it today. For example, in today’s news “Alternative Energy Ltd. of the UK posted a pre-tax loss of $369,049 in the six months from Sept. 1, 2007 to Feb. 29, 2008.”

    A loss of half a million dollars is nothing when you look through your telescope into the future, as far away as two years, I’d guess.

  4. HugeRambo says:

    Although Solar and Wind power are set to play a part in the future energy markets, neither have shown themselves to be a panacea to the world’s energy needs. The simple fact is, if they were viable, we would be using them.

    More steady supply alternate energy sources such a geothermal or nuclear need to be included, because something needs to provide the baseline energy load when the fickle energy sources such as wind and solar are not generating enough power (i.e. nighttime, low wind).

    Natural Gas is THE short to medium term option for most countries because, you can’t burn sunbeams in existing turbine generators.

    Yes I do think that we needs to change our energy production sources, BUT the side of conservative thinking needs to be taken, because if we suddenly say for example “No more coal power.” the price of energy will increase many times over.

    What most people fail to take into account is how the new technologies will be funded.

    Are you as an individual willing to pay ten times (or probably more)the amount you currently do for energy to install some new technology that is untested on large scale energy supply and may fail to meet demand, meaning that for you outlay you aren’t actually getting any benefit?

    Without a doubt, if a new energy source fails to deliver as required, everyone is just going to bring their old fossil fuel generators back online to cover demand, means you money would have been better spent doing what can be done to improve current equipment, while waiting for a technology to be proven effective in bulk energy supply.

  5. solar says:

    i was starting to feel i may possibly be the sole person who seriously considered this, at the very least at the moment i take into consideration i am not idiotic :) let me make sure to find out more about some various articles instantly right after i recieve a touch of caffeine in me, it is rather hard to read without having my espresso, adios for the time being :)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

debt relief
http://debt-settlement-review.toptenreviews.com/national-debt-relief-review.html>