Aviation must become more sustainable, and alternative fuel is one way to achieve this.

The actors behind the Nordic Initiative for Sustainable Aviation, NISA, are Nordic airports, airlines and their industry federations, and aviation authorities. The initiative is supported by aircraft manufacturers Airbus and Boeing as well as IATA (International Air Transport Association).

The parties have come together to form an association to facilitate that the aviation industry gets its share of the limited biofuel resources for use by the aviation sector.

Sustainable aviation

Aviation is prepared to use new sustainable aviation fuels, yet commercial production of sustainable jet fuel is in its infancy. The internationally approved specifications mean that products are fully in line with the current jet fuel used today. The specifications also ensure that they can be used in existing engines on all current and future jet aircraft.

The industry is concerned that other industries and transport sectors are prioritized. In contrast to the other types of transportation, aviation does not have an alternative to the present, fossil based liquid jet-fuel, – at least not in the short or medium term.

Throughout the supply chain

The Nordic initiators will focus on bringing together stakeholders throughout the supply chain to find the best and most energy efficient solutions as well as at the same time put pressure on policy makers to ensure that aviation secures its share of sustainable fuels. The task is quite extensive and involves stakeholders from agriculture, technology suppliers, investors, regulators, producers and oil suppliers.

In all the Nordic countries activity is needed to be a part of the energy policy discussions. Aviation is too important part of the regional infrastructure to be given lower priority. Furthermore, research and development of alternative fuels for aviation should be encouraged in the form of Public Private Partnerships. – Likewise it is also an international issue. Therefore, the Nordic initiative is also in dialogue with parallel activities in the EU and internationally. The support by Boeing and Airbus are of paramount importance since both aircraft manufacturers have participated in the establishment of similar network organizations in other parts of the world.
Behind the Nordic initiative is

5 Nov 2013

The United States Green Building Council has named Sing Yin Secondary School in Hong Kong the greenest school on Earth.

The low-income school teaches students the importance of sustainable living and highlights a variety of ways to do so.

Sing Yin Secondary School

A wide range of renewable energy sources are used to power the boys’ school and educate the students. Leading by example, the building uses wind turbines and solar panels and has a green roof. It also features a bamboo garden, a self-contained coral aquarium and an organic farm.

The classrooms in which the students learn are also green facilities in which they learn to use energy responsibly.

The classrooms are equipped with motion sensors which turn off air conditioning and lights if no movement is detected. Fluorescent LED white light tubes are used to conserve energy, and auto-dimmers dim the lights nearest the window if sunlight is strong.

Double glazed windows help to minimise heat radiation and noise while solar photovoltaic panels outside the windows turn sunlight into energy and minimise heat radiation from entering the classrooms. A solar shade reduces the need for air conditioning in summer months and an automatic weather station sends real time data to the classrooms so they can adjust the air conditioning accordingly.

The Secretary for the Environment, Wong Kam-sing, views the solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of Sing Yin Secondary School in Kwun Tong.

Sing Yin’s roof includes intricately placed solar tracking photovoltaic panels to enhance energy-capturing efficiency. Panels are fitted with water tubes which simultaneously heats up water for bathing while converting sunlight into energy.

The rooftop garden helps to remove carbon dioxide from the environment while lowering atmospheric temperatures. Vertical wind turbines on top of the building convert wind energy to electrical energy.

The ground floor exhibits a plethora of sustainable energy devices. LED lights are powered

by solar and wind energy, the library windows were designed with sandwiched PV panels, the bamboo garden helps to convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, and the office windows have a thermal insulating coating.

LED lights are used in the school’s hallways, which are equipped with solar powered water sprinklers to be used in the event of a fire.

The school’s lift is designed to regenerate electrical energy by recovering gravitational potential energy as electrical energy when the lift goes down.

Sustainability is a large part of the curriculum at Sing Yin, with 100 students selected each year to take on a role as environmental monitors and ambassadors. The school is also active in encouraging the community to become more energy efficient through various campaigns.

Being surrounded by an extraordinary green design and taught the principles of living sustainably will no doubt breed a future of energy-responsible students eager to put their education to good use.

The Global Coalition for Green Schools awarded the school $5,000 to put toward an ongoing or new sustainability project.

12 Nov 2013

he environment is one bad news story after another.

The Pacific Ocean is warming at a rate faster than anything seen in the last 10,000 years and we may have the warmest Arctic in the last 120,000 years. We’re told to brace for more and worse droughts, floods, heat waves, and storms. Coastal communities may disappear from rising seas, entire island nations are going under.

If that all weren’t bad enough, there is a global wine shortage.

The bright side is that we aren’t being blindsided by an unknown enemy: Our relentless burning of fossil fuels is the big thing pushing us toward the brink. So it would figure that a solution to get us out of this mess would be pretty obvious.

That’s why it’s great that there are people like Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford University. While it is one thing to say we want to stop burning fossil fuels, Jacobson (and a team of researchers) are telling us how to do it.

Jacobson was recently on the “David Letterman Show,” where he proclaimed that we have enough wind and solar to power the world.

Is he right? Can renewables really replace fossil fuels? If so, are we willing to do what’s necessary to get there? Let’s take a look at his work and some other new developments.

A Renewable World

In 2009 Jacobson and Mark A. Delucchi, a research scientist at the University of California, Davis Institute of Transportation Studies, published a cover story in Scientific American outlining a plan to power 100 percent of the world’s energy (for all purposes) using wind, water and solar technologies (WWS for shorthand). Their list of acceptable technologies includes several different kinds of solar power, on- and offshore wind turbines, geothermal, tidal, and hydropower. No nukes, no natural gas, no ethanol – only the real deal renewables.

“Our plan calls for millions of wind turbines, water machines and solar installations,” they wrote. “The numbers are large, but the scale is not an insurmountable hurdle; society has achieved massive transformations before,” including our massive highway system and our industrial rampup during World War II.

Their plan, which would provide energy for everything – transportation, heating/cooling, electricity, and industry – would have 51 percent of the energy coming from wind, specifically 3.8 million 5-megawatt (MW) wind turbines. Sound like a lot? “It is interesting to note that the world manufactures 73 million cars and light trucks every year,” they write. Also, the footprint of these would be smaller than the size of Manhattan, and of course they wouldn’t all be clustered in the same area either.

The next big power source is solar – 40 percent coming from a combination of 89,000 photovoltaics (PV) – like the kind you mount on the roof of a home or business – and concentrated solar plants, which usually use mirrors to concentrate light, turning it into heat, and creating electricity with steam turbines. Add in 900 hydroelectric facilities, 70 percent of which we already have, and around 4 percent from geothermal and tidal energy, and the globe is powered by renewable energy!

That’s the plan, anyway. If this seems too big to comprehend, let’s look at the state level. Jacobson has worked with research teams to develop plans for New York and California, and he hopes to do one for each state in the country.

The California plan aims for “all new energy powered with WWS by 2020, 80-85 percent of existing energy replaced by 2030, and 100 percent replaced by 2050.”

They found that, “electrification plus modest efficiency measures would reduce California’s end-use power demand 44 percent and stabilize energy prices since WWS fuel costs are zero.” This is a common finding with researchers delving into electrifying energy systems with renewables – we end up with far more efficient systems, so we need even less energy.

One possible scenario they lay out for California looks like this:

• 25 percent from onshore wind (22,900 5-MW turbines)
• 10 percent from offshore wind (7,233 5-MW wind turbines)
• 15 percent from concentrated solar plants (1,080 100-MW plants)
• 15 percent from solar-PV power plants (1,820 50-MW plants)
• 10 percent from residential rooftop solar PV (16.2 million 5 kW systems)
• 15 percent from commercial/government rooftop PV (1.15 million 100-kW systems)
• 5 percent from geothermal plants (81 100-MW plants)
• 4 percent from hydroelectric power plants (11 1,300-MW plants, 90 percent of which we already have)
• 0.5 percent from wave (4,360 0.75-MW devices)
• .5 percent from tidal (2,960 1-MW turbines)

Their research found this will create 856,000 20-year construction jobs and net 137,000 permanent jobs. Other benefits include protecting the water supply from hazardous spills, cleaning up air pollution (including preventing thousands of premature annual deaths), and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

When it comes to New York, the biggest difference from California is a little less concentrated solar and much more offshore wind. This is their New York plan:

• 10 percent onshore wind (4020 5-MW turbines)
• 40 percent offshore wind (12,700 5-MW turbines)
• 10 percent concentrated solar (387 100-MW plants)
• 10 percent solar-PV plants (828 50-MW plants)
• 6 percent residential rooftop PV (5 million 5-kW systems)
• 12 percent commercial/ government rooftop PV (500,000 100-kW systems)
• 5 percent geothermal (36 100-MW plants)
• 0.5 percent wave (1910 0.75-MW devices)
• 1 percent tidal (2600 1-MW turbines)
• 5.5 percent hydroelectric (6.6 1300-MW plants, of which 89 percent exist)

Now that we have the numbers, we have to ask: is this really feasible? Surmountable Obstacles?

Jacobson and company think their work is technically feasible, although not without significant challenges (more on that below). That doesn’t include the social and political hurdles that are set pretty high. Right now, it looks like an impossible leap. But that doesn’t dismiss the importance of Jacobson’s vision. We may not reach his goal, but he’s pointed us in the right direction.

So has Vasilis Fthenakis, senior research scientist and adjunct professor at Columbia University, who developed a plan that employs solar to power 69 percent of the country’s electricity and 35 percent of all our energy needs by 2050, with 90 percent of all energy in the U.S. coming from solar by the end of the century.

“In contrast to the Jacobson plan, Fthenakis and his fellow researchers concentrate on building a large number of photovoltaic and thermoelectric solar power plants in the sunniest parts of the United States – chiefly the Southwest – and using high voltage direct current transmission to connect these power sources with the rest of the country,” explains Lakis Polycarpou for Columbia University’s Earth Institute.

Jacobson leans more on wind, while Fthenakis puts more stock in solar. But both will take raw materials to build, and that could be problematic. All those wind turbines and solar panels start from materials that will need to be dug out of the ground in someone’s backyard. We could be trading our dependence on Middle East oil for raw earth metals from China, lithium from Bolivia, or copper from the Congo.

“Humankind faces a vicious circle: a shift to renewable energy will replace one non-renewable resource (fossil fuel) with another (metals and minerals),” wrote researchers Olivier Vida, Bruno Goffe, and Nicholas Arndt in Nature GeoScience. “Potential future scarcity is not limited to the scarce high-tech metals that have received much attention. The demand for base metals such as iron, copper and aluminum, as well as industrial minerals, is also set to soar.”

This doesn’t mean, they write, that pursuing renewables should be abandoned; simply that we need a comprehensive strategy in our path forward.

One good thing about an investment in renewable infrastructure is that while it may take many years to build (and much materials), it will also last for decades. We do not need to keep feeding steel into a wind turbine that’s already up and running, unlike the hungry beasts of fossil fuels, which endlessly devour coal, oil and gas.

Supposing we get past the first hurdle of materials, what about some of renewables’ other challenges? The one most levied is intermittency – the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing when you need the energy most. Then what?

“By combining wind and solar and using hydroelectric to fill in the gaps” it can be done, Jacobson told AlterNet. “We found for California that you can do this pretty straightforwardly, wind and solar are very complementary: if the wind is not blowing during the day, the sun is often shining, and vice versa. If you have enough hydro on the grid, which you do on the West Coast, then you can fill in the gaps. You can also use concentrated solar power.”

And then there’s location; what if the wind blows or the sun shines the most in places where you have the least need for the energy. “Transmission is technically not a barrier at all,” said Jacobson. “Maybe you need to do some rezoning, people don’t generally like to add transmission lines. But you can take advantage of a lot of existing lines, increase the capacity on them, that would reduce the issue of having to put in new lines.”

Some of this is already underway. A project installing 3,600 miles of new transmission lines is nearing completion in Texas that would hook up the state’s windy western region with high population centers in the rest of the state. Sustainable Business reported that it would increase the state’s capacity for wind energy by 50 percent.

Another project that’s proposed to begin construction next year would be able to send energy from windy Wyoming, 725 miles to Las Vegas, Nevada.

To get the most efficiency out of the transmission process, you can use high-voltage direct current (HDVC), a big part of Fthenakis’ solar plans. Unlike the AC power we currently use, HDVC transmits electricity with less loss over long distances.

The other massive issue is cost. “If you look historically of all the fossil fuels, they just keep rising and rising,” said Jacobson. “Whereas the wind and solar costs are going down, for the most part. For example, in the last four years costs of installing wind have gone down 50 percent. Solar prices in the last year just went down another 6 to 14 percent, they’ve been gradually declining.”

Fossil fuels, however, may continue to get more expensive. We’re drilling tens of thousands of feet deep. We’re going miles vertically and then horizontally for gas and oil. If you could look at the technology that’s used today to do high-volume horizontal fracturing for shale gas and tight oil, it’s quite complicated stuff. We’re not just putting a straw in the ground anymore. The harder this stuff is to get, the more energy we’re using to do it. It’s not just more expensive; we’re also consuming more energy for extraction than in decades past.

Then there is the obvious point that we don’t seem willing to address. Burning fossil fuels is what’s driving climate change – yet we give the industry a free pass on the externalities. A story in Nature set the price of just the impacts of the release of methane from a melting Arctic at $60 trillion. That’s just the tip of the iceberg. Natural disasters in the U.S. alone last year totaled $110 billion. If the frequency and severity of extreme weather continues to rise as predicted, that number may get a whole lot bigger.

Good News for Renewables

Regardless of specific plans outlined by researchers, there is reason to be optimistic about the future of renewables

In August the Department of Energy announced that in 2012, wind was the top source of new electricity in the country and it was double the amount of wind power the previous year. “The country’s cumulative installed wind energy capacity has increased more than 22-fold since 2000,” the department stated. And it’s not just power, it’s also jobs – nearly three-quarters of all turbine equipment in the country is made at home.

That’s not all. “The price of wind under long-term power purchase contracts signed in 2011 and 2012 averaged 4 cents per kilowatt (kW( hour – making wind competitive with a range of wholesale electricity prices seen in 2012,” the Energy Department reports.

The potential for offshore wind in the U.S. is huge, but it’s yet to become a reality. That may soon change as there are now 11 projects in advanced stages – one in the Great Lakes, two off Texas’ Gulf coast, and the rest in the Atlantic from Virginia north to Massachusetts.

Unfortunately, wind’s huge gains could be dampened next year if the production tax credit that aids wind energy development is allowed to expire at the end of December. Likewise, the solar industry faces a federal tax credit expiring at the end of 2016, which could curb huge growth in that area. Right now, solar is hot. The Solar Energies Industry Association reports that a new solar system is installed in the U.S. every four minutes and the price of a PV system has dropped 50 percent since 2010. Although the amount of energy coming from solar that is used by power plants is only 1 percent, that’s likely to change with larger plants coming on line in the next few years.

Most people in the renewables industry see these tax credits as helping to level the playing field with fossil fuels, which despite being one of the most profitable industries in the world, still sees enormous subsidies. A report released this year by the International Monetary Fund found that global pre-tax subsidies for the fossil fuel industry hit $480 billion in 2011 (post-tax subsidies are nearly $2 trillion).

An optimistic assessment of solar’s future by Deutsche Bank predicts that globally the solar market will be totally sustainable, and not in need of subsidies, in only two years. Country-by-country, things will obviously differ.

The Biggest Hurdle

Jacobson recently said on the “David Letterman Show,” “There is no technological or economic limitation to solving these problems; it’s a social and political issue, primarily.”

These are no small problems. We have a Congress that can’t even agree how to tie its own shoelaces, let alone how to solve the biggest threat facing humanity. Conservatives have waged a war on renewables, seeking to roll back state requirements for renewable energy, but they haven’t always been successful. As more red states like Texas benefit from wind energy, it may well be a losing strategy for them (as it was for arch climate denier Ken Cuccinelli who just lost the race to be Virginia’s next governor).

The Washington Post published the results of a new Pew poll that found only Tea Partiers still cling to anti-science views about climate change; 25 percent of Tea Party Republicans believe in climate change, compared to 61 percent of non-Tea Party Republicans and 84 percent of Democrats.

Despite an outlier (yet vocal) conservative fringe, we’re slowly headed in the right direction. Time is of the essence. Can the change happen quickly enough?

“I think in some sectors it will naturally evolve very quickly like electric cars because they’re so efficient,” said Jacobson. “In other sectors, if we don’t push faster, then they’re just going to change really modestly or not fast enough. I’m pretty optimistic that once people understand what’s going on with the problems, in terms of climate, pollution, energy security, and once they understand there are technical solutions available and the economic solution is available, they will galvanize around those solutions.”

All the finger pointing can’t just be aimed at our elected officials – there has to be broad public support. Renewable projects should still be subject to environmental review, but barring that, it’s no longer acceptable to say that wind turbines or solar panels are too ugly to look at, especially by people who get electricity from coal, oil and gas yet share none of the burden of its extraction or burning.

When we talk about powering our future with renewable energy we have to understand that we’re still talking about impacts – but we have to weigh those against the impacts of continuing to power our world with ever more extreme methods of fossil fuel extraction.

This isn’t simply a matter of changing how we get energy. It means shifting the power dynamic in this country (and across the world), and literally putting power back in the hands of individual people and communities.

At this point, Jacobson’s optimistic goal of 100 percent renewables by 2030 or even 2050 looks out of reach. But what if we aimed for 50 percent for starters, and focused our economy on resilience instead of endless growth? The right wing might kick and scream, but I doubt the world would come to an end. If we keep burning fossil fuels, however, our fate isn’t likely to be very pleasant.

15 Nov 2013

One of the main advantages of using biofuels is that it achieves more than some 85% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The European Union has already mandated a policy of fuel blending: at least 5.75 per cent of all fuel sold has to be biofuel, with the percentage to increase further in the future, and other countries in Asia also have policies encouraging biofuel consumption. Hong Kong lags behind in such initiatives, and it is not difficulty to see why: Eric Ng, in a recent update on the issue, reports official Mok Wai-chuen of the Environmental Protection Department as saying in 2007 that “biodiesel did little to improve roadside air quality”, backed up by 2002 reports from the US National Biodiesel Board and the US Environmental Protection Agency that “suggested the use of biodiesel would result in a relatively modest reduction in roadside emissions”. The irrelevance of such an analysis – blending 5% biofuel into Euro V standard diesel containing 0.001% sulphur could never have meant reducing roadside pollutants – escapes officials; much of the roadside pollutants are carried by prevailing winds from shipping lanes and industries across the border.

If public policy on biofuels is to be decided on this factor alone, then the real benefits of biofuel would be ignored: once the biofuel industry is established, it can process the city’s waste and convert it to fuel; as mentioned before, biofuels hugely reduce greenhouse gas emissions; more importantly, by helping biofuel operations purchase waste cooking oil, the practice of smuggling waste cooking oil across the border to be converted into ‘gutter oil’ and re-used as cooking oil can be stemmed – which would happen to be quite the moral thing to do, given that such usage of recycled oil is carcinogenic and harmful to human health when ingested.

No smooth ride for biodiesel

Eric Ng, SCMP

Wan Po Road, or at least its English rendering – Environmental Protection Road – seems like a contradiction in terms to those living and working in the Tseung Kwan O Industrial Estate to which the road leads.

Neither will the irony of the name be lost on commuters who have to suffer intermittent whiffs from nearby landfills as they travel to and from the estate.

But the same road also leads to a genuine environmental protection industry player hoping to open for business in the estate – a company that has undertaken to turn used cooking oil into biodiesel, which is far cleaner than petroleum diesel.

Unfortunately, the plant’s construction has been suspended, with no official indication of when it will resume.

Hong Kong’s biodiesel producers, who use waste cooking oil as feedstock, say it is difficult to make a profit because of the lack of active government support for such initiatives. The Hong Kong government has set a goal to cut the city’s carbon emission intensity by up to 60 per cent by 2020, but is relying on the greater use of nuclear power to cut its carbon footprint – despite safety concerns raised in Japan after the deadly March 11 earthquake and tsunami.

According to a subcontractor for the project and security guards who declined to be identified, ASB Biodiesel (Hong Kong) has stopped work on a partially-built plant capable of churning out 100,000 tonnes of biodiesel annually.

It is not clear exactly when work stopped. A guard at the 18,000 square metre site said no work had been carried out for several months, while a guard at the entrance to a neighbouring building said it was more like a year since work ended.

No construction workers were seen during two visits to the site by the South China Morning Post on separate week days this month.

According to the final environmental impact assessment report by Environmental Resources Management for ASB in October 2008, construction on the plant was supposed to start in March 2009 and be completed in April last year. After trial runs, commercial production was slated for a June 2010 start.

When ASB chief executive Tom Uiterwaal was interviewed early last year, he said construction was expected to be completed by the end of last year. He declined to comment when asked about the delays and the company’s latest plans.

A person familiar with the company’s operation, who declined to speak on the record, claimed the project would resume construction within two months, and that biodiesel production was expected to start by the end of next year, but he would not elaborate.

He also declined to comment on talk among industry executives that construction was halted because of a lack of funding due to a deteriorating profit outlook for the biodiesel industry internationally, and tightened liquidity in the wake of the global financial crisis.

According to the Malaysian Palm Oil Board, only 10 biodiesel plants were operating last year, despite 29 having been built. A lack of overseas demand and high palm oil prices were blamed.

ASB’s project is funded mainly by the Middle East’s Al Salam Bank-Bahrain and six unidentified strategic partners.

Uiterwaal said early last year that the US$100 million plant would use technology from Austria, which enabled it to use multiple feedstocks, including waste cooking oil, grease trap waste collected from caterers, animal fat, and palm fatty acid distillate – a byproduct from the refining of crude palm oil.

ASB last year hired legislator Tommy Cheung Yu-yan, who represents the restaurant trade, as a consultant.

The European Union has led the world in policy support for the sector, requiring at least 5.75 per cent of all fuel sold to be biofuel – biodiesel or ethanol – rising to 8 per cent in 2015 and 10 per cent in 2020.

Within Asia, Hong Kong lags behind countries such as Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Thailand, in policy initiatives to encourage biodiesel consumption.

Biodiesel is generally more expensive than petroleum diesel, and requires large-scale production and consumption to be economical. To be truly emission-light, local sourcing of feedstock and local consumption of biodiesel is encouraged.

In some developed nations, restaurants pay biodiesel makers to get rid of waste cooking oil, but in Hong Kong, biodiesel makers have to pay for used oil, competing with traders who sell it to mainland recyclers for reprocessing into cooking oil. Consumption of such re-used oil is known to raise the risk of heart disease and cancer.

Beijing issued a policy circular a year ago ordering local governments to step up their fight against rampant illegal trading and recycling of cooking oil.

‘Based on my estimation, over 80 per cent of Hong Kong’s used cooking oil taken away by collectors is sold to the mainland for reprocessing into cooking oil,’ said Teddy Choi Wai-hung, executive director of Champway Technology which operates a biodiesel plant in the EcoPark in Tsuen Mun that can produce 20,000 tonnes of biodiesel annually.

Since it is not illegal to export waste cooking oil out of Hong Kong, and extremely difficult to tell reprocessed oil from previously unused oil without laboratory testing, it is difficult to fight the trade, said Choi.

Furthermore the trade is lucrative since used oil costs around HK$4,500 a tonne to buy and can fetch some HK$7,500 after processing. Fresh cooking oil costs anywhere from HK$10,000 to HK$20,000 a tonne, Choi said.

Champway’s plant has only produced around 4,000 tonnes since it started operating in April last year, due to difficulties in sourcing enough affordable waste oil, according to Choi.

‘Our operation is very difficult to run, given that waste cooking oil prices have been bid up to over HK$50 per 18 litres currently from just HK$20 a year ago,’ he said, adding that it would be difficult to recoup the plant’s HK$60 million investment without more government support.

To encourage proper disposal of waste cooking oil, he said the government should implement a licensing system for collectors of used cooking oil, and restaurants that sell their oil to such authorised dealers should be given a reduction in their waste water treatment surcharge currently collected by the Water Supplies Department.

Steve Choi, an executive director of Sha Tin-based Dynamic Progress International, the first firm in Hong Kong to set up a biodiesel plant three years ago, said the government should abolish an import levy on methanol, which accounts for 11 per cent of the content of biodiesel.

The levy amounts to around 50 HK cents for each litre of biodiesel made, he said. Each litre of petroleum diesel retails for around HK$11 to HK$12.

According to the annual report of its listed parent Alltronics Holdings, Dynamic posted a net loss of HK$6 million last year, down from a HK$8.4 million loss in 2009.

Steve Choi said the government should also be more proactive in promoting biodiesel by becoming a user itself.

‘I hope the government would push for an earlier timetable for its departments in becoming biodiesel users,’ he said. ‘The commercial sector has already made some moves, it is about time the government took some baby steps to promote biodiesel usage.’

So far private sector users mainly use biodiesel out of corporate social responsibility considerations as it is more expensive than petroleum diesel.

Asia Airfreight Terminal (AAT), which runs an air cargo terminal at Hong Kong International Airport, started buying biodiesel from Dynamic last November.

‘Our company adopted biodiesel mainly for the fulfillment of our corporate social responsibilities,’ said Wilson Cheung, AAT’s general manager of support services.

The company, which has a diesel bill of around HK$1.5 million a year, has now replaced almost all of its fossil fuel diesel consumption with biodiesel, except for its stand-by power generator, which is rarely used.

The Hong Kong Jockey Club said it had provided waste oil to Dynamic and bought biodiesel for some of its water-carrying trucks and power generators.

An Environmental Protection Bureau spokesman said the bureau was consolidating views from a public consultation on how to mitigate climate change, including how to promote clean fuels, including biofuels.

The government is also planning a tender for the supply of diesel with a blend of 5 per cent biodiesel made from waste oil, for a one-year pilot scheme. A source familiar with the situation said the government aims to roll out the scheme by mid-2012.

$4,500

The price, in Hong Kong dollars, traders will pay for a tonne of waste cooking oil, meaning supplies are scarce for biodiesel purposes

18 Jul 2011

Biofuel maker pushes product use in market

Eric Ng, SCMP

ASB Biodiesel seeks to jump-start market for cleaner fuel with fresh call for mandatory blending as it prepares to open plant in Tseung Kwan O

ASB Biodiesel, the developer of Hong Kong’s largest biodiesel plant, has renewed its call for the mandatory blending of biodiesel into diesel products sold in the city as a means to jump-start a market for the cleaner burning fuel.

Chief executive Anthony Dixon said Hong Kong had lagged some of its regional neighbours that had implemented mandatory blending, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, South Korea and Taiwan.

“Until now, biofuels have been largely absent from discussions about low-carbon transport and air quality,” Dixon said. “The start of production at our plant will raise awareness of what is possible in Hong Kong.”

Without policy support, ASB, one of three biodiesel producers in Hong Kong, will see its output consumed mostly in Europe – where the bulk of the world’s biodiesel is consumed, thanks to mandatory consumption requirements – after it is sold to international oil firms. Shipping biodiesel to Europe also generates pollutants in addition to the freight costs.

ASB’s plant in Tseung Kwan O is expected to start production soon, with used cooking oil as the biofuel source.

Biodiesel was 5 to 10 per cent more expensive than motor vehicle diesel now available in Hong Kong, the findings of a pilot scheme for government vehicles to test biodiesel use showed.

Noting that the government had focused on cutting roadside pollution by providing incentives for owners of old commercial diesel vehicles to swap them for cleaner models, Dixon said biodiesel also had a role to play. “There is no question from the scientific point of view that biodiesel contributes to the reduction in roadside pollution. It should be part of the solution.”

Mok Wai-chuen, an assistant director (air policy) at the Environmental Protection Department, said in 2007 that biodiesel did little to improve roadside air quality and the government had been taking other more effective measures such as giving grants to encourage early replacement of old diesel commercial vehicles.

Earlier this year, the government proposed providing more than HK$10 billion of subsidies for the phasing out of more than 80,000 pre-Euro IV commercial diesel vehicles by 2020. Hong Kong implemented the Euro V emission standards last year.

A diesel vehicle compliant with Euro V emits about 95 per cent less particulates and 78 per cent less nitrogen oxide than a pre-Euro vehicle manufactured before 1995.

Data cited by Dixon from the US National Biodiesel Board and the US Environmental Protection Agency collected in 2002 suggested the use of biodiesel would result in a relatively modest reduction in roadside emissions. Blending 20 per cent of biodiesel into fossil fuel diesel would cut carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions by about 12 per cent, with no reduction in nitrogen oxide emission, the data showed.

Where biodiesel makes a bigger difference is in greenhouse gas emissions, data cited by Dixon from the European Union suggested biodiesel produced from recycled cooking oil emitted at least 85 per cent less greenhouse gases than fossil fuel diesel. Biodiesel made from plant oil results in a reduction of only about 40 per cent.

Dixon said Hong Kong’s neighbours that had imposed mandatory biodiesel blending required the addition of 1 to 5 per cent of biodiesel and blending rates ranged between 2.5 and 7 per cent in the EU.

He added that he was optimistic that all of ASB’s output would be consumed in Hong Kong in three years as the government was expected to step up efforts to tackle greenhouse gas emission.

Besides cutting pollution, domestic consumption of biodiesel would also help reduce smuggling of Hong Kong’s used cooking oil into the mainland for the production of so-called recycled “gutter” oil, which is known to contain cancer-causing substances.

Legislator Paul Tse Wai-chun told the Legislative Council in March that government figures showed about 10 million litres of Hong Kong’s 22.8 million litres of used cooking oil were exported annually, with the whereabouts of the remaining 12.8 million litres unknown. He said some of that oil was likely to be smuggled to the mainland badged as a “second-hand product” to escape regulations under the Waste Disposal Ordinance.

Under Hong Kong’s pilot scheme, 5 per cent of biodiesel is blended into diesel used by government vehicles. The vehicles involved accounted for about 8 per cent of the Euro V diesel consumption by the government.

A spokesman for the Environmental Protection Department said the two-year second phase of the scheme had been rolled out, with the addition of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department and the Government Logistics Department as biodiesel users.

Dixon said he hoped the government would require all departments to adopt a 5 per cent mandatory biodiesel blending policy by the middle of next year.

Undersecretary for the Environment Christine Loh Kung-wai said she had recently met the bosses of all three biodiesel makers from used oil.

“Hong Kong is fortunate to already have three biodiesel producers,” Loh said. “We are actively discussing with the producers and other stakeholders to join up all the pieces in a new policy as part of the work of the government’s steering committee on recycling. A new policy can be expected in the foreseeable future.”

Loh would not comment on whether it would include mandatory biodiesel consumption.

ASB chose Hong Kong for its plant due to the high density of restaurants in a relatively small land mass, which lowers the logistics costs for collecting the waste cooking oil. Dixon said that even if Hong Kong did not implement mandatory diesel blending, ASB’s plant would still be profitable selling to Europe.

The company, 75 per cent owned by Bahrain-based Al Salam Bank and other Middle Eastern investors pulled in by the bank, is looking to build a biodiesel plant in another Asian city.

The Tseung Kwan O plant, with the capacity to churn out 100,000 tonnes of biodiesel a year, cost US$165 million to build, compared with an original budget of US$100 million. It was originally slated to come on stream in mid-2011. Construction was halted for a year due to cost overruns and funding shortages.

ASB aims to source 30 to 40 per cent of its feedstock from Hong Kong within two years, with the rest from Southeast Asian countries such as Singapore and Malaysia.

28 Oct 2013

by Cheung Chi-fai

A proposed offshore wind farm off Sai Kung might not see its blades rotating for at least another two years after the city’s largest power producer decided to extend a feasibility study into its economic viability and technical design.

The wind farm, proposed by CLP Power for construction near the Ninepin islands, was once said to be the city’s most ambitious renewable energy project and was targeted for completion by 2016. But the firm now appears to be taking a more cautious approach to the project.

Offshore wind farms in Hong Kong can hardly be described as feasible (HK Magazine)

Richard Lancaster, chief executive of CLP Holdings, the firm’s parent company, said the group had already spent 10 years looking into how to build a wind farm in Hong Kong, but it did not want to make a hasty decision.

“The decision has to be taken quite carefully as it is a big investment. We need to make sure the costs are fully understood,” he said at the World Energy Congress in South Korea last week.

Lancaster said more solid wind data would be required to confirm the project’s economic feasibility, and that a couple more years of study were needed.

The lengthening of the study means the multibillion-dollar project is unlikely to be part of the five-year development plan the company submitted to the government earlier this year.

Construction of the infrastructure for the wind farm would boost the value of the firm’s fixed assets, which is the basis on which its maximum permitted profits by the government are calculated. The greater the asset value, the higher the return allowed.

The firm is facing uncertainty ahead of the expiration of the current regulatory regime for the power industry, also known as the Scheme of Control Agreement, in 2018. A decision will likely be made before 2016 on whether the electricity market will be liberalised.

CLP estimated in 2011 that a 200 megawatt wind farm with up to 67 turbines would cost up to HK$7 billion and would lead to a 2 per cent rise in customer tariffs.

Lancaster said he would prefer the wind farm, if it were accepted, be paid for by all the company’s electricity users.

21 Oct 2013

Plasma Torches in action (PyroGenesis 2006)

You can read more about the technology here in a white paper from the Gasification Technology Council of the US, and its advantages in application presented in a 2012 symposium by Louis Circeo and Luciano Bardari. The Westinghouse Plasma Corporation of Canada also presents its current plasma projects in the UK, China and India.

One of the effects of Typhoon Usagi, which received little attention, was its impact on the Honghaiwan wind farm in Shanwei, eastern Guangdong, about 130 kilometres northeast of Hong Kong. The onshore wind farm comprises 25 imported Vestas V47 600KW turbines. The website Windpower Intelligence reports that eight of the turbines were blown down by the typhoon, while the blades of another eight turbines were blown off, and the blades of the remaining turbines are being examined to see if they can operate normally.

Typhoon Usagi's damage to turbines in Shanwei's wind farm (CCTV, SCMP)

CCTV2 reported that 70 per cent of the wind farm had been knocked out. Windpower Intelligence reports that one of the managers says the typhoon has led to 100 million yuan in losses for the wind farm. This is the second time the wind farm has suffered typhoon damage. The farm was hit in 2003 with damage to 13 out of 25 turbines, causing losses of 10 million yuan.

The recent damage may have caused some unease within the government and possibly within Hongkong Electric and CLP, the two companies planning wind farms in Hong Kong waters. CLP, Hong Kong’s largest power company, plans to build what will be one of the biggest offshore wind farms in the world off Sai Kung – generating 200 megawatts a year – at a cost of almost HK$7 billion. Hongkong Electric is to build a HK$3 billion wind farm between Lamma Island and Cheung Chau that would generate 100MW of power – enough for 50,000 households.

Since Shanwei is fairly close to Hong Kong, it is frequently used as a reference for winds in Hong Kong. “This is another indication of how ill-advised these Hong Kong wind projects are,” Ng Young, the chairman of Hong Kong’s Association for Geoconservation, told Lai See.

The companies are still involved in testing work, and construction has yet to begin. At best the two wind farms might produce about 1.5 per cent of Hong Kong’s total electricity production, and reduce its output of carbon dioxide by about 2 per cent. This miniscule contribution comes at a cost of HK$10 billion. Regardless of how useless these wind farms are, the government can point to them as its contribution to reducing Hong Kong’s carbon footprint and take its place in the world’s effort to limit the production of carbon dioxide, and thereby global warming, or so they would have us believe. As for the power companies, the farms are a wonderful opportunity for them to increase their net assets at a time when returns from the scheme of control, which governs them, have been reduced from 13.5 per cent to 15 per cent under the previous scheme, which ended in 2009, to 9.99 per cent under the current scheme. But they will get 11 per cent on their wind farm assets since they are a form of renewable energy. Meanwhile, the public picks up the bill in the form of higher electricity prices. Higher fuel costs are inevitable, but better to spend this on efficient clean energy like gas.

Ng says the wind farms are unsightly and kill birds, and are an unreliable source of energy. He makes the point that the Shanwei wind farm operates at an average of 17 per cent to 18 per cent efficiency: “The government is silly to support this project – building this white elephant just for the sake of appearing to do something green, when in fact it is damaging the environment, and costing the community a lot of money in terms of higher fuel bills and higher costs to business. The only beneficiaries are the power companies.”

Definitive Agreements Signed, Initial Deposit Received for the Sale of a MagneGas Gasification System for $2.7 Million

TAMPA, Fla., April 2, 2013 /PRNewswire/ — MagneGas Corporation (“MagneGas” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: MNGA), the developer of a technology that converts liquid waste into a hydrogen-based metal working fuel and natural gas alternative, announced today that it has signed definitive agreements with Clear Sky Energy S.A. de C.V. (“CSE”) in which CSE will purchase a Plasma Arc Flow™ gasification system from the Company for an aggregate purchase price of $2.7 million plus 5% royalties. In addition, CSE will be an exclusive distributor for MagneGas products and services in Mexico.

“CSE is very pleased to represent the MagneGas technology in Mexico. The opportunities in front of us are numerous and broad in scope. We feel the MagneGas technology will have a significant impact in the industrial gas, sewage treatment and hazardous waste treatment markets. We are confident that the combination of CSE’s access to markets coupled with the MagneGas technology will result in several significant opportunities to satisfy the growing demand for Liquid Waste to Energy solutions in Mexico,” said Manuel Juan Marcos , CEO of CSE.

“We were amazed by the access to markets CSE has in Mexico. The recent demonstration to potential CSE customers was well managed and tremendously convincing,” stated MagneGas CEO Ermanno Santilli . “MagneGas provided a mobile unit for testing in Mexico and the CSE team brought oil wastes from around the country. Together we performed a live demonstration of oil wastes being gasified by our recycler, MagneGas feeding a generator and electricity being produced on demand. The customer feedback was very positive.”

The MagneGas IR App is now available for free in Apple’s App Store for the iPhone or iPad http://bit.ly/AfLYww and at Google Play http://bit.ly/Km2iyk for Android mobile devices.

To be added to the MagneGas investor email list, please email pcarlson@kcsa.com with MNGA in the subject line.

About MagneGas Corporation

Founded in 2007, Tampa-based MagneGas Corporation (NASDAQ: MNGA) is the producer of MagneGasa, a natural gas alternative and metal working fuel that can be made from certain industrial, municipal, agricultural and military liquid wastes following the receipt of appropriate governmental permits.

The Company’s patented Plasma Arc Flowa process gasifies liquid waste, creating a clean burning hydrogen based fuel that is essentially interchangeable with natural gas. MagneGasa can be used for metal working, cooking, heating, powering bi fuel automobiles and more. For more information on MagneGas, please visit the Company’s website at www.MagneGas.com.

About CSE

CSE, formed in 2010, focuses on the development and distribution of sustainable, green energy technologies in Mexico. In particular Clear Sky Energy maintains a focus on helping the energy industry in Mexico dispose of traditionally challenging waste and waste material in ways that are significantly more environmentally conscious and friendly when compared to current methods. CSE and its principals have deep ties to the energy industry in Mexico. CSE will be a leader in assisting companies deal responsibly with newly adopted regulations aimed at better protecting citizens and the environment in Mexico and Latin America.

VLADIVOSTOK, RUSSIA — Asia-Pacific nations have made a breakthrough in promoting trade in green technologies, and the United States is pressing ahead with efforts to carve out a regional free-trade zone, a senior U.S. official said Friday.

Speaking before a summit of leaders of the 21-member Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum, Demetrios Marantis, the deputy U.S. trade representative, said the group had agreed to cut import duties on technologies that can promote economic growth without endangering the environment.

“This is really a significant achievement, in that it shows how APEC can lead,” Mr. Marantis said in an interview after ministers finished their preparations for the summit meeting Saturday and Sunday in the Russian port of Vladivostok. “It allows us to accomplish the twin goals of liberalizing trade and green growth.”

Ministers agreed on a list of 54 green technologies that will be subject to import duties of 5 percent or less beginning in 2015, following through on a commitment made by leaders at the last APEC summit in Honolulu a year ago.

The list includes equipment used in generating power from renewable energy sources like the sun, wind and biomass; treating waste water; recycling; and environmental monitoring.

Officials have described the clean technology initiative as a main summit “deliverable” for APEC, a consensus-based group that focuses on economic issues and links rising nations led by China with advanced economies like that of the United States.

APEC represents 40 percent of the world’s population, 54 percent of its economic output and 44 percent of its trade. Exports within the group are expected nearly to triple over the next decade to $14.6 trillion, while exports to non-APEC countries will double to $5.6 trillion, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Next year, APEC will tackle so-called local content requirements — in effect, import restrictions. The United States views the requirements as impediments to trade.

The diverse nature of the Pacific-Rim economies — which unlike the debt-stricken economies of Europe are showing relatively strong growth — has led some APEC countries to join Washington in pushing for a new free-trade deal called the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Mr. Marantis said trade ministers from nine nations participating in the Trans-Pacific Partnership talks had met in Vladivostok and affirmed their determination to move ahead at negotiations to be held next week in Leesburg, Virginia.

The Leesburg talks will be the 14th round in a Trans-Pacific Partnership process that was initiated by APEC leaders at a summit meeting two years ago.

Negotiators will seek to iron out further details of a 29-chapter multilateral free-trade deal.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is made up of: Australia, Brunei, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. Canada and Mexico are due to join the group in October.

Mr. Marantis said the group was “working together to create a high-standard, 21st century trade agreement that addresses a lot of problems that exporters are facing in a way that will grow jobs and create new opportunities for exporters.”

There are no deadlines for completing the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal, but Mr. Marantis said negotiators were seeking to complete the bulk of their work next year.

“Substance will drive timing — that’s what’s really important,” Mr. Marantis said. “If you look at how much progress we’ve been able to make in such a short amount of time, we’re working to wrap up as much as possible over the course of 2013.”

The Trans-Pacific Partnership ties in with President Barack Obama’s goal of doubling American exports within five years of his election in 2008. It has been described as the biggest free-trade pact since the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement.

China, the world’s second-largest economy, is not a party to the process, while the APEC summit host, Russia — which has only just joined the World Trade Organization — says it is not ready to look at joining the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

The Citizens Trade Campaign, a U.S. umbrella group, has criticized the Trans-Pacific Partnership process as overly secretive and has called demonstrations against the Leesburg talks, fearing that a free trade deal could result in the loss of American jobs.