Science and Sustainability

Share this Post Or Bookmark

Close Bookmark and Share This Page

Save to Browser Favorites / Bookmarks

Ask backflip blinklist BlogBookmark Bloglines BlogMarks Blogsvine BuddyMarks BUMPzee! CiteULike Connotea del.icio.us

Digg diigo DotNetKicks DropJack dzone Facebook Fark Faves Friendsite folkd.com Furl Google

Jamespot Jeqq Kaboodle kirtsy linkaGoGo LinkedIn Ma.gnolia Mister Wong Mixx MySpace Netvouz Newsvine

oneview OnlyWire PlugIM Propeller Reddit Segnalo Shoutwire Simpy Slashdot Surphace Sphinn Spurl

Squidoo StumbleUpon Technorati ThisNext Twitter Webride Windows Live Yahoo!

Email This to a Friend

  Link HTML: 

 Permalink: 

 If you like this then please subscribe to the RSS Feed.

Powered by Bookmarkify™

More »

Phil Norris

Hi there after a long absence.  This time we shall be having a good look at how the process industry can become more sustainable in energy terms both now and in the future through the appliance of good science.  This is prompted by a debate last week at the Scottish government’s Low Carbon Investment conference in that the development of offshore wind energy on offshore wind energy.  The fear is that a poor regulation and a lack of skills in industry will lumber Scotland with an unsustainable offshore wind energy generation industry.

On the one hand, a government’s view is that the pace of development is unsustainable to achieve Scotland’s new target of 80% (as opposed to a 50% previously) coming from renewables by 2020.  This should be set in the context of a Europe-wide target of 20%.  The contra view expressed by an investment banking group was: “unforgiving” targets were necessary to foster ambition and leadership.  Another view from the renewable power industry was a warning that focusing on a medium term target for 2020 will lead to a boom and bust scenario with the industry going over a precipice after 2020 when the target has presumably been achieved.

What has this got to do with the process industry?   Well, the process industry is a big user of energy and some parts of it at least are investing heavily in using new technologies and science to wring the best efficiency out of the various processes to reduce energy costs.  It is good business after all, especially with the price of highly taxed energy, to reduce the processing costs.

The Scottish debate serves to demonstrate that, in keeping with the rest of the economy, the sustainability of increasing the rate of change in the UK and the wider world towards a greater percentage of installed power generation, is partially reliant on private investment.

My own view, which come from a long career in project management, is that one, you need to set a goal that will provide the result in the future needed for the good of the planet and the life upon it and two, you should set about finding a viable (sustainable) means of achieving it.  The debate at the planning stage, comes about because there is a perception of over regulation.

Private industry, principally the process industry, generates huge incomes from generating power and it is being invested in new science and new technologies.  The problem is the sheer amount of energy that civilisation uses to sustain and grow itself.   Mankind is rapidly approaching a watershed where fossil fuel use becomes unsustainable (perhaps we have even gone past it).

New Renewable Energy Source

But when will the next commercially exploitable  scientific breakthrough come about?   People like to think that Nuclear Fusion is the answer but its commercial exploitation is seemingly still decades away.  No, we are faced with the now of using renewable energy from the wind, water, the sun and heat from the ground.  Therefore we should be looking to throw a lot more energy (perspiration) in achieving sustainable economic growth and ever greater efficiency in our energy use and reuse and not worry too much about undue regulation to get there.

The Scottish debate and historical precidents in the industrial revolution only goes to show that wanting to maintain an industry beyond its natural lifespan never has worked and is unlikely to do so in the longer term.  In 2020, we will no doubt be looking back and saying we have bought some time in ecological (climate change) terms  and in the future, new technologies based on novel science will at last be in view and be taking over.  The process and power industries will still be there, using their economic muscles, to take sustainable power and power usage forward.

My last word on this, perhaps, controversial subject this time, is that the process industry should continue to lobby for less regulation and more action to ensure that we don’t miss the chance of achieving sustainability in our energy use, not only for for the energy itself, but also for less regulation to ensure a flexible but sustainable power industry.

Hasta mañana