Deadline is 18th June. Share your views on future fuel mix

[lx3h]

Be sure to share your view!

http://www.enb.gov.hk/sites/default/files/en/node2605/Fuel Mix - Response Form E web.pdf

 

[DITB]

Why don't they mention any solar or wind power?

Does the sun ever shine in Hong Kong?

Is the wind ever blowing?

Are there any empty rooftops/walls for solar panels, any hills or mountains for wind turbines?

Or should we keep getting more and more dependant on our Big Brother for water, electricity and food?

I suggest Hong Kong keep the ban/blocking/obstruction on electric bicycles, solar electric/heating and wind turbines, and instead focus on building 3 to 5 large coal power plants throughout Hong Kong, or we will have to say goodbye to the Hong Kong smog.

 

[markwj]

Why don't they mention any solar or wind power?

Does the sun ever shine in Hong Kong?

Is the wind ever blowing?

Are there any empty rooftops/walls for solar panels, any hills or mountains for wind turbines?

Or should we keep getting more and more dependant on our Big Brother for water, electricity and food?

I suggest Hong Kong keep the ban/blocking/obstruction on electric bicycles, solar electric/heating and wind turbines, and instead focus on building 3 to 5 large coal power plants throughout Hong Kong, or we will have to say goodbye to the Hong Kong smog.

The full consultation document is here (and worth reading):
http://www.enb.gov.hk/sites/default/files/en/node2605/Consultation%20Document.pdf

One oft-missed/mis-quoted point regarding the import option (which I favour) is that the grid in southern china is massive and approaching 50% renewable (mostly hydro from Yunan).

Interesting that they've gone quiet on the nuclear option after Fukushima.

BF:
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/news_events/legco/files/EA_Panel_101022b_eng.pdf

AF:
http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/news_events/legco/files/EA_Panel_110429a_eng.pdf
Hong Kong nixes its fuel-mix plan - SmartPlanet

In 2009 coal was about 54% of the fuel mix, followed by natural gas 23% and nuclear power 23%. Target set (in 2010), for 2020, was for 10% coal, 40% natural gas, and 50% nuclear. Following F, that proposal has been dropped (or 'hidden' amongst imported electricity).

Costs I've previously seen are approximately 50c/kWh for imported electricity, 40c-60c/kWh for coal, and 70c-90c for natural gas. Renewables are quoted as 'some multiples' of those prices.

While solar sounds good for Hong Kong, the high-rise and flat-root arrangement is non-optimal. Wind farms are very possible, both mountainside and offshore, but neither CLP nor HKE seem interested in the capital expenditure.

Bottom-line: if we want to reduce the carbon footprint without increasing electricity bills, nuclear is the only option. If we accept a moderate increase in bills, then a switch from coal to natural gas is an option. If we accept a significant increase in bills, then renewables (wind primarily) are an option.

My-offer: You can double my electricity bill so long as (a) everyone pays the same, (b) I get 100% renewable fuel.

 

[DITB]

CLP/HKE don't have to invest in renewables themselves. The government just need to ensure private persons and companies are not met by fees, regulations and red tape to make it impossible. Unfortunately, most available surfaces for solar and mountains for wind, are controlled and owned by the very same government that doesn't want to invest in it.

Are there any other wind turbines in Hong Kong, apart from that single unit on Lamma Island?

HK Electric Investments - System Busy
Lamma Winds - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CLP is writing about an offshore wind farm here Hong Kong Offshore Wind Farm though I think that is some 4 years ago they had a thought about it.

-

Correction - it was 2006 the proposal was released, so it's 8 years ago, really. 150MW from 50 turbines. Imagine how it would be today, with 2014 grade wind turbines? While each turbine in the proposed 2006 project was 3MW, new models can do up to 8MW - each.

Largest Wind Turbine In World Ready For Production | CleanTechnica

While Lamma Island has 1 x 800kW (0.0008 GW) wind turbine installed, Denmark has a total of 1.27 GW installed (off shore alone, add to that on-shore), while the UK has 3.68 GW offs-shore wind power available.

In other words, if Hong Kong installed 6200 Lamma Island wind turbines, they would match the total of the UK and Denmark off-shore wind turbine capacity. Maybe not a fair comparison, so let's take Denmark alone:

Denmark has 1.27GW off-shore only, while the combined off-shore and on-shore wind power capacity is 4.8 GW. At the moment, about a third of all electricity used in Denmark comes from wind power, and the share is increasing year by year:

Wind power in Denmark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Denmark has a population of around 5.6 million, while Hong Kong has 7.2 million.

Denmark has 850W wind turbine capacity pr person, while Hong Kong has about 0.1W wind power pr person.

7700 times more wind power pr person in Denmark, compared to Hong Kong, and that is not even including the 500+ MW of solar PV capacity in Denmark.

The price of one kWh in Denmark is around 3 HKD (including a lot of taxes!), while in Hong Kong it is variable around 1 to 2 HKD pr kWh

It's all about money, power and genuine concern of environment and everyones best, compared to individual wealth and power. Go figure.

 

[markwj]

CLP/HKE don't have to invest in renewables themselves. The government just need to ensure private persons and companies are not met by fees, regulations and red tape to make it impossible. Unfortunately, most available surfaces for solar and mountains for wind, are controlled and owned by the very same government that doesn't want to invest in it.

Hmmm. If supplier A using dirty coal is pricing 50c/kWh, and supplier B using renewables is pricing 150c/kWh, which would CLP / HKE choose to tie to? Without a 'cost' attributed to the pollution, or two different prices for renewable/dirty electricity, the free market will choose the cheapest.

Are there any other wind turbines in Hong Kong, apart from that single unit on Lamma Island?

CLP is writing about an offshore wind farm here Hong Kong Offshore Wind Farm though I think that is some 4 years ago they had a thought about it.

That proposal seems bogged down for the past few years in environmental impact assessments. Ridiculous considering the known environmental impact of burning fossil fuels.

 

[DITB]

Hmmm. If supplier A using dirty coal is pricing 50c/kWh, and supplier B using renewables is pricing 150c/kWh, which would CLP / HKE choose to tie to? Without a 'cost' attributed to the pollution, or two different prices for renewable/dirty electricity, the free market will choose the cheapest.



That proposal seems bogged down for the past few years in environmental impact assessments. Ridiculous considering the known environmental impact of burning fossil fuels.

The issue is that there is no price on pollution. THAT alone is the key to move on, towards cleaner air.

While one coal kWh can be produced for ~50 HK cents, what are the derived costs to health, clean air, global CO2 increases and subsequent flooding, storms, draughts and so on? Immeasurable, really. In reality, 150c clean is much cheaper than 50c dirty. The problem is that the cost of burning coal is not for each consumer, but for everyone to share. Ask those people who don't even have access to electricity - they breathe the polluted air so us richer ones can get cheaper electricity.

Nothing will change until energy is tagged with a unit tax which is proportional to the pollution generated from it.

No subsidies are needed, really, just an assessment of each energy source: How dirty is it? Add tax to it - at the source, not at consumer level. In Denmark, there are certain subsidies to many wind turbines, on the other hand, all electricity at consumer level bears CO2 and pollution taxes. This is silly, backwards thinking. What they really need to do is move carbon and pollution taxes to each source of energy production, world wide.

Again, there are too many people with too much power and money involved. They are NOT going to let this happen, as the world uses cheap energy as one of the parameters of industrial competition. If Hong Kong (and China especially) added a fair carbon and pollution tax to electricity, most of the industrial production would shut down overnight. Apart from wind turbine and solar panel production.

So there you are, your cheap China crap you can buy, while complaining over bad air quality. Like pooing in your own swimming pool, and we love it.

 

[lx3h]

No matter what, only solar and wind are viable. I would love to see Hong Kong buillding the kind of incinerator like those in Japan, but seems like Donald Tsang's visit to Japan did not help him or the government gain any knowledge.

Total disappointment.

The thing about solar energy in Hong Kong, will at least work on every rooftop. Imagine solar panels on every rooftop in Hong Kong! How much less polluted will Hong Kong be? Cost of maintenance should be subsidised by the government.

BTW, I did mention these in the form that I submitted.

 

[DITB]

No matter what, only solar and wind are viable. I would love to see Hong Kong buillding the kind of incinerator like those in Japan, but seems like Donald Tsang's visit to Japan did not help him or the government gain any knowledge.

Total disappointment.

The thing about solar energy in Hong Kong, will at least work on every rooftop. Imagine solar panels on every rooftop in Hong Kong! How much less polluted will Hong Kong be? Cost of maintenance should be subsidised by the government.

BTW, I did mention these in the form that I submitted.

What cost of maintenance? A solar panel just needs to have some of the dirt washed off now and then. Have it sloped a bit, and polished smooth, the rain should take care of that.

Hybrid thermal-electric (PV-T) panels would be much better, like this one THE HYBRID SYSTEM SOLARUS . There are air condition units available now which are powered via thermal difference (i.e. solar thermal power), using only electricity as backup when the thermal energy isn't enough to drive the compressor. Normally, when you need the air con the most, is when the sun shines the most. Even if not using thermally driven air condition motors, a hybrid thermal-electric solar panel can even use the PV for direct 15-20% electricity, then the 80% thermal can be used to drive steam and a turbine, to produce even more electricity. In the winter, even Hong Kong needs space heating, for which the system can also be used. And year round, you still want hot water.

Obviously, solar panels don't work well at night, or during heavy rain, so we also need wind turbines, and even some fossil fuel for backup when there is neither wind nor enough light. We just need to minimise the use of the fossil fuels, especially coal. For cleaner air, and for independence of imports. This effects currency trades (less import), as well as political dependancies (China shutting off power and water if HK is too naughty-naughty)

Add recycling of garbage, to reuse most of it, and burn the rest - that will also solve the problem with no more landfill space. Less plastic in the ocean, which takes centuries to get rid of. I would rather see the mountains full of wind turbines, rather than garbage landfills.

Recycling is unrealistic? A country like Sweden have been so successful in recycling that they now have to import garbage from neighbouring "dirty" countries to satisfy the "recycling infrastructure".

It can be done, if there is a will to do so.

THAT, is the question. Is there enough willpower to get it done? Will people learn to sort their garbage into food waste, glass, metal, plastic, cardboard etc?

 

[lx3h]

What cost of maintenance? A solar panel just needs to have some of the dirt washed off now and then. Have it sloped a bit, and polished smooth, the rain should take care of that.

Hybrid thermal-electric (PV-T) panels would be much better, like this one THE HYBRID SYSTEM SOLARUS . There are air condition units available now which are powered via thermal difference (i.e. solar thermal power), using only electricity as backup when the thermal energy isn't enough to drive the compressor. Normally, when you need the air con the most, is when the sun shines the most. Even if not using thermally driven air condition motors, a hybrid thermal-electric solar panel can even use the PV for direct 15-20% electricity, then the 80% thermal can be used to drive steam and a turbine, to produce even more electricity. In the winter, even Hong Kong needs space heating, for which the system can also be used. And year round, you still want hot water.

Obviously, solar panels don't work well at night, or during heavy rain, so we also need wind turbines, and even some fossil fuel for backup when there is neither wind nor enough light. We just need to minimise the use of the fossil fuels, especially coal. For cleaner air, and for independence of imports. This effects currency trades (less import), as well as political dependancies (China shutting off power and water if HK is too naughty-naughty)

Add recycling of garbage, to reuse most of it, and burn the rest - that will also solve the problem with no more landfill space. Less plastic in the ocean, which takes centuries to get rid of. I would rather see the mountains full of wind turbines, rather than garbage landfills.

Recycling is unrealistic? A country like Sweden have been so successful in recycling that they now have to import garbage from neighbouring "dirty" countries to satisfy the "recycling infrastructure".

It can be done, if there is a will to do so.

THAT, is the question. Is there enough willpower to get it done? Will people learn to sort their garbage into food waste, glass, metal, plastic, cardboard etc?

Watched one TVB programme on solar power promotional scheme back 10 years ago. Secondary schools could apply for one-off funding to install solar panels on their rooftops. After a decade against rain and wind, their solar panels are barely better than half dead. Since the schools do not get extra funding for maintenance or repair, they decided not to continue with solar energy as it does not seem beneficial to them after doing the math. The tech surely have advanced much and the cost of the panels should have gone down a lot since a decade ago, but without continuous push or subsidy from the government, it is hard to get solar back on track. The Hong Kong government has a tendency not persevere in anything they started.