- Australian Institute of Energy

NE W S
ENERGY
Official Journal of the Australian institute of Energy
www.aie.org.au
Volume 31 No 4 – OCTOBER 2013
Urba n E n erg y | Dema n d Ma n a g e m e nt
Lo w-Ca rbo n M o bil it y | Avia t io n Fue l s
ISSN 1445-2227
(International Standard Serial
Number allocated by the National
Library of Australia)
Energy
News
Journal Correspondence
Joy Claridge
PO Box 298
Brighton, VIC 3186
email: [email protected]
Advertising
Members (and non-members) may place
advertisements in EnergyNews on behalf
of themselves or their organisations. If you
wish to use this opportunity contact:
Joy Claridge
PO Box 298
Brighton VIC 3186
email: [email protected]
Advertisements can include
products,services, consulting, and
positions vacant and required.
CONTENTS
SPECIAL FEATURE
Discounts are available for members and
forall advertisements repeated in two or
more issues.
URBAN ENERGY
Subscription Information
BRANCH EVENTS
EnergyNews is published by !e Australian
Institute of Energy and is provided to
all members as part of the membership
subscription. Non-members may obtain
copies of this journal by contacting either
the Secretariat or the Editor.
Contributions Welcome
Articles on energy matters, letters to the
editor, personal notes and photographs
of those involved in the energy sector are
most welcome.
Published By
86
low-carbon mobility
94
a walk on the demand side
96
future of aviation fuels
98
kurnell refinery
99
gas shortage in nsw
100
jemena in gas transmission
102
The Australian Institute of Energy
ABN 95 001 509 173
ARTICLE
Registered Office
Level 1/613 Canterbury Road,
Surrey Hills VIC 3127
nuclear energy policy
Postal Address
PO Box 193 Surrey Hills VIC 3127
BOOK REVIEW
Telephone Toll Free: 1800 629 945
Facsimile: (03) 9898 0249
CLIMATE CHANGE ETHICS
107
MEMBERSHIP MATTERS
108
email: [email protected]
Web Address
http://www.aie.org.au
104
Print Post Approved No.
PP 32604/00001
Disclaimer
Although publication of articles submitted
is at the sole and absolute discretion of the
Australian Institute of Energy, statements
made in this journal do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Institute.
Cover: illawarra flame house
courtesy SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS RESEARCH CENTRE,
UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG
Special Feature
Urban E ne rgy
Trigeneration unit at GPT’s Charlestown Square,
designed by AECOM
Source: GPT Group / Charlestown
As the world becomes more urbanised, energy in buildings and cities will be increasingly important. For this
special feature, we present:
n An article by Toby Roxburgh MAIE, Sector Leader District Energy (Australia & New Zealand), AECOM (and Chair, AIE
Canberra Branch) on sustainable and resilient energy planning for towns and cities with a focus on district energy
n The Green Building Council of Australia and the value of the Green Star
n NABERS and Legion House
n A brief look at some of some related technologies being developed and deployed in Australia around – solar cooling,
low-carbon building materials and power-exporting buildings
Sustainable and resilient energy
planning for towns and cities
By Toby Roxburgh
Energy in everything
We can see energy is part of life, our
environment and our towns and cities
(Figure 1).
It struck me at the Australian Institute of Energy national conference last
year how much the energy industry is in a state of change. While the
presentations covered a wide variety of topics and sectors, a consistent
message was change as prioritisation of energy security, energy cost
and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions put various pressures on the
energy system.
86 Figure 1: Energy Sustainability
Source: AECOM 2013
Energ y
Ne w s
For example, 20 years ago energy
options were managed in a fairly
simplistic way in eastern Australia
– use coal and hydropower for
electricity, natural gas to cook and
heat our homes, and petroleum
fuels for transport. When it came to
constructing a building, energy usage
was seldom a major consideration.
Today when we consider energy
options it is no longer enough to fix
one aspect at one point in time or
to focus wholly on supply to meet
demand. We now need to look at
multiple interconnected systems and
over the system lifetime. This makes
our task as energy professionals more
complex. With rising energy costs,
infrastructure costs, environmental
awareness, technical change and
regulation, there is increased pressure
on industry professionals to focus on
improving the way we meet the needs
of our society in the most effective and
efficient manner.
Now there are a larger number of
energy sources to choose from
and requirements to consider.
For example, we must meet the
National Construction Code (NCC)
requirements for energy usage,
consider an energy rating (ie
NABERS) and a green rating (ie
Green Star) for each building. Energy
options now include solar thermal and
solar PV, district energy, onsite gas
generators, integrated façade energy
options, energy from waste, peak
demand reduction, load shedding,
live information displays, integrated
precinct delivery, biodiversity and
heritage requirements, and more.
An example of this is where AECOM
assisted Grocon to achieve their
sustainable vision at Legion House.
Energy prices have risen and our
population footprint has grown. Bush
fires, storms and floods all provide
risk of blackouts and our ageing
infrastructure is more stretched. We
are not alone to be considering this
more closely. In the United States we
have seen storms cut power to whole
cities, flooding basement standby
power generation and leaving only
university campuses with power
(which have their own district energy
systems). Making our towns and cities
more resilient is therefore becoming
the energy focus. Can we be more self
sufficient?
Deliver clean, cheap,
resilient and reliable energy
Given all this pressures how do we
make our cities environmentally,
economically, and operationally
sustainable? To answer this question,
we need a great deal of information.
We need informed decisions that
take the energy system into account.
For example, consider the trend to
build large houses with lots of glass
and without eave shading. These
became very hot in summer; like
a greenhouse. They need a large
amount of air-conditioning to make
the home comfortable to live in. In
turn the air-conditioning load meant
a large amount of infrastructure was
required to provide energy for only a
few extremely hot days a year. This
increased infrastructure cost has
become a major feature of our energy
bills. We are now seeking to reverse
trends such as this one.
Information
We live in an information age and,
given the complex problems, we
need a large amount of information
simplified and presented clearly for
us to make decisions and inform
stakeholders. This has been my focus
as a consultant in sustainable energy.
Triple bottom line reporting, whole
of life (WoL) costing, cost–benefit
analysis (CBA) are now being
used constructively in many
sectors. Looking over the life of the
project allows us to make upfront
decisions that will help the town, city,
development, building or tenancy
over the longer term and assist in
making the town or city become more
sustainable.
Various government and private
initiatives have sought to simplify
the information and make it more
accessible. The NABERS energy
rating is Australia wide and provides
star rating on offices, shopping
centres, data centres, hotels and
homes. When we rent office space
for example we can get an indication
how much your energy bills are likely
to be and the GHG emissions the
office will create. This information has
empowered companies and driven
energy usage down for buildings.
Other examples in the energy space
include NatHERS (Nationwide
House Energy Rating Scheme) for
residential buildings. Green Star
as a wider rating tool incorporates
energy into the rating for buildings
and urban development projects
and the Infrastructure Sustainability
Council of Australia’s sustainable
infrastructure tool incorporates energy
as a consideration for infrastructure
delivery.
In the private sector, complex
information is shared using tools
such as the free Davis Langdon Blue
Book (www.aecom.com/bluebook).
AECOM, for example, uses an
embodied carbon metric along with
Davis Langdon to calculate embodied
carbon within a building. These
tools and methodologies provide the
information required to answer energy
rating questions and provide answers
to crucial questions such as how
much will the energy for the building
cost now and in the future?
Figure 2: AECOM’s evidence-based sustainability methodology
Source: AECOM
En e r g y
Ne w s 87
Sustainable solutions
By taking information and applying
it in methodologies and tools we
can look at options and optimise our
planning of towns and cities. We can
calculate the costs behind decisions
and provide accurate comparisons
to select a sustainable cost-efficient
outcomes.
Specialists working together can
deliver tailored innovative solutions
and create integrated solutions. We
can now alter data selection points live
in workshops and shorten agreement
and delivery times (Figure 2).
The energy part of the sustainable
puzzle can be complex and needs
to be tailored for each project. A
suggested simplified approach (green
arrow below) moves from the urban
planning stage to energy efficiency,
district energy, renewables and
peak demand reduction. This allows
sequential decision-making, but still
requires an integrated model and
methodology showing how changes in
one will impact the others.
undertake the same work is usually
the cheapest energy option. Energy
reduction should be undertaken first
to avoid oversizing energy delivery
plant. With grant funding and low
interest loans and leasing options
reducing your energy has become
easier. The Energy Efficiency Council
(EEC) is a body dedicated to this goal.
Demand from tenants as companies
are looking for lower energy bills and
lower GHG emissions has created
demand for higher energy rated
buildings. Once you have reduced
your energy, how else can you
improve the system?
District energy / Distributed energy
Looking more broadly we have energy
being created outside the towns and
cities and being transported down
wires. These wires can be over large
distances, cost significant capital
to upgrade and maintain and incur
energy losses along their length
and have contributed to a significant
portion of electricity price rises
recently. Burning coal or gas also
creates a large amount of heat and
there are limits as to how much this
heat can be captured.
To limit these losses, local generation
can be used where the heat is
Urban Planning
What we build where has a direct
and obvious effect on energy
infrastructure. For example, at the Box
Hill greenfield development there were
significant differences in energy usage
between including a commercial belt
and increasing the industrial area.
Planners need to provide evidence
behind their plan, estimated land
value and cost of infrastructure both
need to be considered upfront and we
now have tools and methodologies to
display information in geographical
information systems (GIS) and
incorporate specialist knowledge into
delivery indicators such as whole
of life cost and make integrated
sustainable decisions. Government,
utilities, consultants and developers
working closely together can achieve
effective results such as in the ACT
where infrastructure capacity is now a
key planning consideration.
Figure 3: Combined summer energy usage for an office and residential area
Source: AECOM 2013
Energy efficiency
Do we really need to use the energy?
Reducing the energy required to
88 Energ y
Ne w s
Figure 4: District energy system with cogeneration
Source: AECOM 2013
recaptured and energy transportation
losses are minimised. The City
of Sydney has significant plans
to undertake district energy, with
Brisbane, Canberra and Melbourne
also looking at similar options.
At the local level district energy gives
the opportunity to share resources.
For example, air-conditioning plant
can be shared between offices and
residences (as simplistically shown in
Figure 3).
District energy can use a wide range
of energy sources and can reticulate
chilled water, hot water, and/or
electricity. It can incorporate energy
storage and provide a base to support
renewables or peak demand reduction
(Figure 4).
Figure 5: Solar PV impact on peak demand
Source: AECOM SSIMde energy model
Renewables
Having reduced energy usage and
losses, reducing non-renewable
fuels, such as coal, gas and oil,
that are finite resources and can
produce unwelcome outputs is
another important sustainability focus.
Renewables can be combined within
the building façade, on the building,
within the precinct or where the
resource is outside the towns and
cities. Tools are available to compare
costs, time of day availability the
impact on the electricity network
(Figure 5).
Peak demand reduction
Finally reducing energy infrastructure
is crucial to keep costs down. Peak
demand reduction targets areas that
are close to full operational capacity
usually for only short periods in the
year. The aim is to avoid or defer
increasing the size of the wire or
adding unnecessary infrastructure.
In Brisbane, for example, with high
summer air-conditioning peak
demand, the Brisbane City Council
and Energex are working together
to deliver a district cooling scheme
with load able to be shifted by chilling
water overnight and using the chilled
water to cool buildings during the
day. International knowledge from
international projects has been
applied by AECOM to provide the
detailed technical and financial
options available.
The benefits of integration
An integrated energy system
that brings sustainable process
together delivers further benefits by
optimising decisions. For example,
output from AECOM’s SSIM district
energy model feeds into an overall
transparent sustainable systems
integration methodology and this
energy information can then feed into
carbon metrics, infrastructure or green
star ratings to communicate what is
proposed and support the sustainable
energy planning process (Figure 6).
The energy system also needs to be
integrated with the wider systems,
and after implementation, monitored
and constantly updated. These feed
into a sustainable whole-of-life system
across energy and other systems as
shown in Figure 7. It is a constantly
changing and exciting challenge.
Given the huge shift and changes
in energy we have an opportunity to
increase productivity and improve our
quality of life.
Using the increased data, modelling
methods and sustainable planning
methodology we can optimise our
environments and create exciting
sustainable towns and cities. Energy
pressures will continue to change
but with our increased knowledge
and capabilities we can harness
the resources we have and create
wonderful places to live, enabled
by energy sector and broader
community.
Figure 6: Energy flow diagram for a precinct including savings
Source: AECOM SSIMde energy model
Figure 7: Sustainable operation life cycle
Source: AECOM 2013
En e r g y
Ne w s 89
GBCA and the value of the
Green Star
NABERS and
Legion House
The Green Building Council of Australia (GBCA) was established
in 2002 to develop a sustainable property industry in Australia and
drive the adoption of green building practices through market-based
solutions. GBCA launched the Green Star environmental rating system
for buildings in 2003. Green Star rating tools help the property industry
to reduce the environmental impact of buildings, improve occupant
health and productivity and achieve real cost savings, while showcasing
innovation in sustainable building practices.
• On average, Green Star-certified
buildings use 50% less electricity
than if they had been built to meet
minimum industry requirements.
NABERS is a national rating
system that measures the
environmental performance of
Australian buildings, tenancies
and homes. NABERS measures
the energy efficiency, water
usage, waste management and
indoor environment quality of a
building or tenancy and its impact
on the environment. It does this
by using measured and verified
performance information, such
as utility bills, and converting
them into an easy to understand
star rating scale from one to six
stars. For example, a 6-star rating
demonstrates market-leading
performance, while a 1-star rating
means the building or tenancy
has considerable scope for
improvement.
• The cumulative savings in GHG
emissions from Green Star-certified
buildings equates to 172,000 cars
removed from our roads, when
compared to average Australian
buildings – that is 625,000 tonnes
of CO2 per annum.
For example, Grocon has signed a
commitment agreement with the New
South Wales Office of Environment
and Heritage to achieve a NABERS
6-star energy rating for Legion House,
part of the redevelopment at Sydney’s
161 Castlereagh Street.
• Green Star-certified buildings
save the equivalent of 76,000
average households’ electricity use
annually.
Legion House will be the first
refurbishment of a heritage building
to commit to a 6-star NABERS energy
rating since the NABERS scheme
was extended to 6 stars in 2011.
Grocon is planning to achieve a
carbon and water neutral outcome at
Legion House. In an Australian first
for a CBD office building, it plans to
disconnect from the mains electricity
grid, and is investigating a range of
options to supply surplus renewable
power, including biomass gasification
technology to be supplied to the office
tower on site.
Green Star rating tools are currently
available or in development for
a variety of sectors, including
commercial offices (design,
construction and interior fit outs), retail
centres, schools and universities,
multi-unit residential dwellings,
industrial facilities and public
buildings. Currently in pilot stage
is the Green Star - Communities
rating tool, one of the world’s first
independent, transparent, national
schemes able to assess and certify
the sustainability of community-level
projects. Green Star – Communities
is a voluntary rating tool that provides
best practice benchmarks and thirdparty verification of the sustainability
of community and precinct-wide
developments.
In late 2012, the GBCA conducted the
first-ever quantitative research study
into the overall impact of Green Star
certified projects on GHG emissions,
operational energy usage, operational
water consumption, and construction
and demolition waste.
The study compared data from
428 certified project submissions
with standard or minimum practice
benchmarks. The methodology and
findings have been peer- reviewed for
accuracy by independent consulting
firm Net Balance.
The report was published in May
2013 and its key energy findings
were:
• On average, Green Star-certified
buildings produce 62% fewer GHG
emissions than average Australian
buildings.
90 Energ y
Ne w s
• On average, Green Star-certified
buildings produce 45% fewer GHG
emissions than if they had been
built to meet minimum industry
requirements.
• On average, Green Star-certified
buildings use 66% less electricity
than average Australian buildings.
Since Green Star’s introduction to
the market in 2003, more than seven
million square metres of building
area have been Green Star-certified.
The higher the Green Star-certified
rating of a building (4, 5 or 6 star) the
greater the environmental savings
across all key areas – greenhouse
gas emissions, energy use, water
consumption, and construction and
demolition waste. The research is
ongoing, with aggregated results
to be published annually. For more
information on research methodology
and to download the full “The
Value of Green Star: A Decade of
Environmental Benefits” research
report, please visit www.gbca.org.au
and go to the ‘Resources’ section.
"The most significant challenge in
achieving the 6 star rating will be
that Legion House doesn’t have any
access to sunlight or wind, so we’re
restricted in what forms of renewable
energy we can use," said Grocon Site
Engineer (Sustainability) Brendan
Coates. "As far as we are aware,
Grocon is the only organisation to look
at using the technology in this way,
with the entire fuel, gas, electrics and
electricity production on the one site.
The technology is not new or unique,
but the way we will set it up on the one
site is unique."
The highly energy efficient design
embraces a number of other
environmental initiatives, from
vacuum toilets to timber sourced from
sustainably managed forests and
high thermal performance curtain wall
facades.
"Along with our consultants, Grocon
will be running energy models
regularly and stringently in order to
meet our NABERS targets," said Mr
Coates. "For example, a computer
model examines how the building
is built, including all the materials,
the envelope, and services, such as
lighting and HVAC (heating, ventilation
and air-conditioning), which enables
us to run it against occupancy and
other known variables. As the design
decisions are finalised, the model is
developed to ensure we are running
on track and that we pick the best
sustainable options.”
NABERS is managed nationally by
the NSW Office of Environment and
Heritage, on behalf of Commonwealth,
state and territory governments. For
more information, see
www.nabers.gov.au
Solar cooling
CSIRO scientists are developing
new technologies that use the
natural heat from the sun (solar
thermal energy) to provide space
cooling, or heating, for buildings,
homes and offices, to help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions from
air-conditioning.
Solar cooling uses concentrated solar
thermal energy to power a thermally
driven cooling process. A solar
cooling system consists of:
• solar thermal collectors which
capture the heat from the sun
• absorption cooling machine to
convert heat to cooling. Depending
on the application, this could be an
absorption chiller, an adsorption
chiller or a desiccant cooler.
CSIRO’s solar cooling research
facilities include a controlled climate
test facility and air-conditioner
prototype test lab.
Currently, CSIRO engineers are
developing a new desiccant solar
cooling system for home use. It is an
innovative three-in-one technology
that provides hot water, cooling and
heating. It works by using heat from
the sun and employs both desiccant
and evaporative cooling technologies.
Solar heat is first collected and stored
as hot water, which can be used
throughout the house. A portion of
the hot water is diverted into the
solar air-conditioning unit, which is
used to either heat or cool the air
coming into the building. The hot
water enters a heat exchanger in the
first compartment of the unit. Similar
to a car radiator, the heat exchanger
uses the hot water to heat outside
air that has been drawn into the first
compartment through the vent. At the
same time outside air is also being
drawn into the second compartment
into a desiccant wheel. The desiccant
wheel is the most critical part of the
system. It is used to dry out the air
before it goes into the house. Slowly
turning, the desiccant material in the
wheel continuously absorbs moisture
in the second compartment and then
the absorbent material dries out in
the first compartment. The desiccant
material is dried out using the hot dry
air generated by the heat exchanger.
This air is then exhausted outside the
home. The dry air from the desiccant
wheel flows through an indirect
evaporative cooler that creates a
stream of cool dry air. This cool dry
air is then fed into the home in order
to cool down the rooms. In winter the
solar heated air can be used directly
to warm the house.
The solar air-conditioning system
uses only a fraction of the electricity
of current air-conditioning systems
and halves GHG emissions. A solar
desiccant cooling system is being
tested in real conditions at the Hunter
TAFE campus in New South Wales.
To find out more, see
www.csiro.au/solar-cooling
Carbon bricks
A new method for permanently
and safely storing carbon
emissions generated from
fossil fuels and other industrial
processes will be trialled in a
mineral carbonation research pilot
plant to be built at the University
of Newcastle.
The ultimate goal is to transform
the captured CO2 emissions into
carbonate rock 'bricks' for use in the
construction industry, therefore both
dealing with carbon storage needs
and introducing new green building
materials.
Funding totalling A$9 million has
been secured from the Australian and
New South Wales Governments and
Orica. The project will be managed by
Mineral Carbonation International, a
partnership between the University's
commercial arm Newcastle Innovation,
the GreenMag Group and Orica.
Solar cooling system at Hunter TAFE
Source: CSIRO
The research pilot plant will allow for
larger scale testing and determine
cost savings and emission reductions
compared to other methods of storing
CO2. The key difference between
geosequestration and ocean storage
and the mineral carbonation model
is the permanent transformation of
En e r g y
Ne w s 91
CO2 into a usable product; rather than
storing it underground.
The mineral carbonation technology
replicates the Earth's carbon sink
mechanism by combining CO2
with low-grade minerals such as
magnesium and calcium silicate rock
to make inert carbonates. The process
transforms the CO2 into a solid
product that can be used in many
ways, including as new green building
materials. The Earth's natural mineral
carbonation system is very slow. The
challenge is to speed up that process.
For more information, visit
www.newcastleinnovation.com.au
Power-generating commercial building
The Global Change Institute’s (GCI’s) A$32 million building at the University of Queensland (UQ) in St Lucia is
set to produce more power than it will consume.
Although located in the sub-tropics, it will be naturally
ventilated for most of the year while a super low-energy
comfort conditioning mode ensures occupant comfort
in even the hottest and most humid Brisbane days. The
building generates and stores all its own power on-site
through renewable solar energy sources that are pollutionfree. All excess power will be delivered back to the national
grid.
The GCI building, designed by Hassell, represents the first
Australian use of structural geopolymer concrete, a lowcarbon product produced with significantly lower GHG
emissions than conventional concrete.
GCI Director Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg said his team
wanted to push the boundaries and create a building that
symbolised the institute's work.
The building features an operable sun shading system that
tracks the sun and protects the glass louvres that optimise
natural ventilation for 88% of the year. The air flows across
occupied spaces to the central atrium that acts as the
building's lungs, discharging warm air through its thermal
chimney. The translucent ethylene tetrafluoroethylene
atrium roof optimises natural light to the interior and is also
heat-resistant. The building is cooled with chilled water
flushed through exposed sculptural precast floor panels.
Rainwater storage of 60,000 litres services the hydronic
cooling system, kitchen and shower. Optimal natural
lighting is supported by environmentally-friendly LED
lighting.
In closed ventilation mode air is pre-cooled through
a labrinyth before an innovative 'free-energy' comfort
conditioning system cools and dehumidifies the air using
a heat recovery sensible wheel and dessicant thermal
wheel. Moisture is expelled from the air via a phase change
material heated from 90°C hot water generated in an
evacuated solar tube water heating system.
A green wall and bio-retention basin breathe life into
the building's green ethos, and UQ's St Lucia campus
pedestrian links provide easy access by foot or bike.
For more information, see
www.gci.uq.edu.au
Global Climate Institute, University of Queensland
92 Energ y
Ne w s
Zero-carbon fibro house
A young Australian team took up the challenge set by the United States
Department of Energy and the China National Energy Administration to
“accelerate the development and adoption of advanced building energy
technology in new and existing homes” and won. The Solar Decathlon
invites collegiate teams to design and build energy-efficient houses
powered by the sun. These teams spend almost two years creating
houses to compete in the 10 contests of the Solar Decathlon.
The winning team produces a house
that:
• is affordable, attractive, and easy to
live in
• maintains comfortable and healthy
indoor environmental conditions
• supplies energy to household
appliances for cooking, cleaning,
and entertainment
• provides adequate hot water
• produces as much or more energy
than it consumes.
The first Solar Decathlon China was
held in Datong on 2–13 August 2013,
where an Australian team – Team
UOW Australia won the top prize for
the Illawarra Flame house.
The University of Wollongong teamed
up with TAFE Illawarra Institute to form
UOW Australia, the first team from
Australia to gain entrance into a Solar
Decathlon. Inspired by the Illawarra
flame tree’s spring time renewal and
transformation, more than 50 students
Illawarra Flame House, Wollongong
and staff designed and built the
house, which is the first in the history
of the competition to demonstrate how
to retrofit an existing home.
Students were required to build and
operate a house that is both advanced
and appealing as well as energy
efficient and cost effective and costing
approximately A$300,000 to build in
Australia.
The Illawarra Flame was built to be
a net zero energy home, generating
more energy than it consumes. The
finished house highlights passive
design concepts such as east-oriented
for warm light in the winter and a
raised roof for cooling ventilation in
the summer. Up-cycled charity shop
furniture, double glazed windows
and native drought resistant plants
are used through the home adding to
the environmentally friendly nature of
the project. Illawarra Flame highlights
the importance of using the existing
housing supply already in Australia
and the notion that retrofitting is
neither expensive nor complex.
Only about 2% of houses are replaced
every year in Australia emphasising
the point that adjustments to inefficient
older houses are more likely than
building new homes. To tick another
box on the already innovative project,
the Illawarra Flame is targeted at 65
or older ‘empty nesters’, who will
account for almost 25% of Australia’s
population in 2025. The house will
allow for downsizing to a cleaner,
smarter home without sacrificing
luxury.
The team built the house in Australia
then disassembled and shipped it
to Datong. The UOW team finished
with score of 957.6 out of a possible
1000 points as well as receiving first
place awards in categories such as
engineering, architecture and solar
application. This project not only
starts the conversation on sustainable
building and retrofitting but also what
innovative and feasible technologies
are available to the future homes of
Australia.
To learn more about the Illawarra
Flame or the Solar Decathlon see
www.illawarraflame.com.au
UOW Australia team members on the verandah in Datong, China
En e r g y
Ne w s 93
branch events
The three Zero Race teams; Team Trev on the right
Source: www.zero-race.com
L o w-Carbo n M o b i l i t y :
TREV and the
A fri c an S o l a r T a x i
Presentation to South Australia Branch by Peter Pudney, Senior Research Fellow, Barbara Hardy Institute,
University of South Australia, on 17 July 2013
Low-carbon mobility is possible
with a combination of public
transport, walkable cities, cycling,
telecommuting and clean cars.
Half of our daily vehicle commutes
are less than 40 kilometres; 90%
less than 110 kilometres.
Low-carbon commuters’ needs could
be met by a car with:
• two seats
• 150-kilometre range
• recharged using renewable energy
• energy use less than 200 kJ per
kilometre
• mass less than 350 kilograms
•simplicity.
94 Energ y
Ne w s
Meet TREV, designed and built by staff and students at the University of South
Australia to demonstrate that such a vehicle is possible.
TREV specifications
Size
3.3 x 1.2 x 1.2 m Mass
320 kg
Seats
2, tandem layout
Wheels2+1
Tyres
165/65R14, low rolling resistance
Suspension
short-long arm wishbone (front) and trailing arm (rear)
Chassis
tub chassis made from aluminium foil honeycomb boards
Body
foam with fibreglass skin
Canopy
blown acrylic
Motor
20 kW (peak) permanent magnet brushless motor
Transmission fixed ratio planetary reduction gear
Brakes
disc brakes
Energy source electricity generated from solar or wind
Battery
80 kg lithium ion polymer (13 kWh)
Range
over 200 km
Top speed
120 km/h
Acceleration 0-100 km/h in 10 seconds
Energy use
less than 1/5 of the energy use of a conventional car
In 2010, TREV competed in the Zero Race, carrying two
people around the world, powered by renewable energy. To
get TREV ready, Team Trev placed a larger battery beneath
the floor to give a range of up to 250 kilometres; improved
the brakes and suspension; made the back seat more
comfortable and got the car registered.
Team Trev members have a long history of designing,
building and racing solar cars for the World Solar
Challenge, and are keen to make electric vehicles practical
for everyday use.
The Zero Race aimed to popularize small, efficient vehicles
and show that low-carbon vehicles can be smart, reliable
and usable. Teams Trev, Oerlikon Solar and Vectrix
completed the 28,000 kilometres within 80 days, and
TREV’s fuel cost only A$400.
Trev in Xianyang, China, during Zero Race
Source: University of South Australia
electric vehicles that are rugged, lightweight, simple and
cheap.
To verify the design and the application of these
technologies, a trial will be conducted in Zimbabwe,
commencing in 2014. Solar charging infrastructure will
be installed at St Albert’s Mission Hospital and one health
clinic in northern Zimbabwe, and several electric vehicles
in both locations will collect pregnant women from nearby
health clinics and villages, and will convey them to the
Waiting Mothers’ Home ahead of their expected delivery
dates.
The Stage 1 trial is expected to operate for 12 months.
Once Stage 1 is completed and the results assessed,
preparations for Stage 2 will commence, aiming to roll out
further solar charging infrastructure and electric vehicles
to health clinics in the Zambezi Valley, north of St Albert’s
Mission Hospital.
The Zambezi Valley is rugged and remote, so the
charging infrastructure and vehicles will need to be robust
and reliable. Stage 1 is intended to thoroughly test the
infrastructure and optimise the vehicles which can be
manufactured and maintained in Zimbabwe. It is hoped that
if the Stage 1 and Stage 2 trials are successful, the African
Solar Taxi can find application in other parts of Zimbabwe
and Africa.
The current design uses a body and seats constructed
from low-mass polypropylene honeycomb panels. The
windscreen and roof are a single sheet of acrylic. A 6 kWh
lithium ion phosphate battery will power a 2 kW bicycle
motor in each of the rear wheels.
African Solar Taxi
Team Trev and the University of South Australia are now
both project partners for the African Solar Taxi. The other
partners are:
CESVI – a secular, independent, Italian non-government
organization working internationally with the moral
principle of human solidarity and the ideal of social justice,
which transform into humanitarian aid and development,
reinforcing an affirmation of universal human rights.
Team Trev has completed the design of the Taxi and
selected the major components and will start building the
first prototype in October 2013. They have also started
developing a system for scheduling trips between clinics
and the hospital to maximize the effectiveness of the
system.
For more information, see http://africansolartaxi.com and
www.unisa.edu.au/solarcar/
St Albert’s Mission Hospital – a district hospital overlooking
the Zambezi Valley in northern Zimbabwe near the
Mozambique border. It services a population of more
than 120,000 people and, each year, admits about 5,000
patients, treats about 40,000 outpatients and delivers about
2,600 babies.
The Zimbabwe maternal mortality ratio is one of the highest
in the world at 960 deaths per 100,000 live births. A key
factor in maternal mortality and morbidity, particularly in
rural areas, is the lack of adequate reliable and affordable
transport services. Petrol is very expensive, electricity is
scarce and unreliable, and many women cannot afford to
pay for transport. Some women walk very large distances
to medical facilities.
The African Solar Taxi will be a small electric vehicle that
can carry three people: a driver, a pregnant woman and
her assistant (mother, sister or nurse). It will combine solar
charging infrastructure (a solar PV array, an inverter, a large
storage battery and battery management electronics) with
Before: Women in Zimbabwe boarding an ox cart for transport to hospital
After: Render of
African Solar Taxi
En e r g y
Ne w s 95
A Wal k o n th e Dem a n d S i d e
Presentation to AIE Melbourne Branch by Dr Gill Owen, Research Programme Leader, Consumers and Energy Markets,
Monash Sustainability Institute, on 18 July 2013
Why the demand side?
On the supply side of electricity there
are a few large actors – networks,
retailers, generators and aggregators.
On the demand side there are millions
of customers, with whom it is so much
more complicated to engage. Further,
customers may increasingly have new
forms of electricity consumption (heat
pumps, electric vehicles) and could
also be generating electricity (solar
PV).
Costs in the electricity system (and
impacts on electricity bills) are
driven by overall demand (total
amount of electricity consumed) and
peak demand (maximum amount
consumed at any one time). However,
peak demand is a particularly
important driver of costs; infrastructure
is effectively unused for much of the
time, yet the companies who built it
need to recover the high fixed costs.
Thinking about peak demand is
important because if we reduce overall
demand but peak demand stays the
same or increases, we will increase
costs in the system that will still have
to be recovered. We need to tackle
peak as well as overall demand to
reduce costs.
The Australian Government estimates
that 25% of retail electricity costs are
derived from peak events that occur
over a period of less than 40 hours
per year. The rapid growth of peak
demand relative to overall (or average)
demand has been a major factor
influencing costs in the Australian
electricity system. Between 2005
and 2011, peak electricity demand
increased 1.8% a year, while total
electricity demand grew at 0.5% a
year. Maximum summer demand
increased by 20–38% from 2001 to
2012 (varies across states). During
the same period, average electricity
demand increased by only 15%.
Households account for 25% of total
electricity demand but contribute up to
45% to the peak demand times of day
across the system. Peak demand time
is 4–8 pm, when business demand
96 Energ y
Ne w s
is still high and household demand
rises as people get home from
work and school. One of the most
significant drivers of peak demand is
use of air-conditioning. Growth in the
installation and use of air-conditioning
by households has been particularly
rapid in recent years. Seventy-three
per cent of households in Australia
had an air-conditioner in 2011
compared to 59% in 2005.
What is demand response?
Demand response refers to changes
in electricity use by customers from
their normal consumption patterns; for
example, a shift in electricity use from
peak to off-peak periods. Demand
reduction refers to a reduction in the
overall amount of electricity used,
not just a shifting from peak periods.
Within the electricity system the
purposes of demand reduction or
demand response are: to help reduce
wholesale costs (short and long-run),
improve system reliability or reduce
network reinforcement costs.
We can facilitate customer demand
response and demand reduction by:
• different types of tariffs
• contracts (mostly for business
consumers) to curtail load at
pre-agreed times or in response
to changing conditions on the
electricity network
• automation including 'smart'
controls, thermostats and
appliances that respond to
changes in the electricity network
or a price signal
• efficient appliances, lighting and
insulation measures to reduce
electricity demand
• information and feedback; for
example, via in-home displays,
web portals, information on bills,
so that customers can identify
ways in which they can reduce or
shift their demand.
Some customers (both in the United
Kingdom and Australia) have had a
form of time-of-use (TOU) tariff for
many years– typically for electric
storage heating and controlled load
water heating, which is very common
in Australia. In many countries, TOU
tariffs trials involve typically three
rates: off-peak, shoulder and peak.
Critical peak pricing (CPP) – high
peak rate for very high demand – is
sometimes used on very hot days in
countries with a lot of air-conditioning.
Dynamic tariffs enable responses to
short-term changes in the demand–
supply balance; for example, when
there is more wind power on the
system, to avoid high wholesale
prices. Automation/direct control
can make the demand response
more certain and potentially more
convenient for customers.
There have been many trials of TOU
tariffs and CPP worldwide. Average
peak response is around 5%, but
responses of up to 30% have been
recorded. Higher responses tend to be
realised with automation and with CPP.
Good information, such as in-home
displays and information on bills,
can improve response. Responses
tend to be greater (in percentage
terms) among household rather
than business customers. However,
because the latter use more electricity
the absolute effect will be greater from
business customers.
The UK experience
The United Kingdom’s Office of Gas
and Electricity Markets (Ofgem)
introduced the Low Carbon Networks
Fund (LCNF) for the electricity
distribution price control period
2010–15. Up to £500 million over
five years was made available for
projects sponsored by distribution
network operators (DNOs) to try
new technologies and operating and
commercial arrangements for smart
grids. DNOs have to bid in competition
with each other for the funding and
in partnership with others such as
electricity retailers. The objective is
to help all DNOs understand what
they need to do to provide security
of supply at value for money as the
Source: “Project Lessons Learned from Trial Recruitment”, page 12 (accessed from http://www.networkrevolution.co.uk/industryzone/projectlibrary)
© Northern Powergrid (Northeast) Limited, Northern Powergrid (Yorkshire) Plc, British Gas Trading Limited, EA Technology Limited and the
University of Durham, 2013
United Kingdom moves to a low
carbon economy.
The first projects started 2011.
Northern Powergrid’s Customer Led
Network Revolution (CLNR) project
runs from 2011–2013 under the
LCNF and with contributions from
electricity retailer, British Gas, which
installs the smart meters and recruits
the customers to the trial. The aim
is to test the scope for customer
demand response for customers in
general and also for those with heat
pumps, electric vehicles and solar
PV. Customers were offered different
options – TOU tariffs and direct load
control – with some in a control group
where usage – half hourly and total –
is just monitored. The study includes
households and small businesses,
as well as larger industrial and
commercial customers.
• half who have signed up say they
already use little electricity at peak
times; monitoring of usage will see
whether this is true
• solar PV customers are very
engaged; they want to see what
they are generating and when;
question is ‘will they maximise
appliance use when generating
their own electricity?’
• electric vehicle customers difficult
to recruit as take up of these
vehicles has been below previous
government estimates
• heat pump take up also slow, but
may increase as the government is
providing an incentive scheme.
The Irish experience
• smart meters proved an incentive
to sign up
Ireland’s electricity smart metering
customer behaviour trial of TOU
tariffs and information over two
years in 2009 and 2010 is one of the
largest and most statistically robust
to date. Run by the Commission for
Energy Regulation (CER), it involved
5000 households and 650 business
customers.
• majority signed up because they
believe they will save money
on bills (even without sign up
incentive)
The TOU tariffs for households
included shoulder rates that were
20–40% more than off-peak rates
and peak rates that were 50–300%
Early findings in relation to
households include:
• customers positive about TOU, less
keen on automatic control
more than shoulder rates. Some
groups also received information,
such as billing and displays, and/or
demand reduction financial incentives.
Households reduced overall electricity
usage by 2.5% and peak usage
by 8.8% (both results statistically
significant). Interestingly, the actual
rates on the TOU tariff were found
to have limited impact; it was the
fact of being on a TOU tariff that was
more important than the detailed tariff
design.
Concluding remarks
Demand-side initiatives, such as
smart tariffs and automatic control,
can deliver flexible electricity demand
and demand reduction, with potential
benefits to electricity networks,
the supply–demand balance and
electricity customers. Trials to date
have shown customer interest and
some good responses, but also
some challenges with some customer
groups and some types of demandside management. Considerable work
may need to be done to convince
some customers to take up demandside management products and
deliver their potential. It’s all about the
customer!
En e r g y
Ne w s 97
Future o f Av i a t i o n Fuels
Presentation to Sydney Branch Young Energy Professionals by Flyn van Ewijk, Manager Environment, Qantas, and
Dr Susan Pond, Chair, Australian Initiative for Sustainable Aviation Fuels, and Adjunct Professor, United States Studies
Centre, University of Sydney, on 18 June 2013
The next time you think about transport fuels, take a thought for the
skies. Jet fuels account for 10% of the fuel used for transport, with an
annual fuel bill of A$4.3 billion for Qantas alone (30% of its operational
costs). All of this fuel turns into hot air – ie mainly carbon dioxide and
water vapour. Between 1971 and 2009, carbon emissions grew 153%,
while energy consumption more than doubled. Demand for jet fuel in
Australia is forecast to double again from 2013 levels in the next 20
years. Together the fuel and emissions bills pose a significant cost
to an industry that is globally competitive with low margins. Despite
improvements in aviation fuel efficiency, costs from fuel and emissions
will continue to rise.
Airlines are always looking for new
ways to reduce fuel consumption,
their exposure to high and fluctuating
fuel prices and their carbon footprint.
Sustainable aviation fuels are
becoming such an option. Sustainable
jet fuels are produced with renewable
feedstocks including natural plant
oils and/or animal fats. These are
refined through hydrotreating and
isomerisation/cracking with hydrogen
(primarily from natural gas). To be
viable, the fuels must be sustainably
sourced from a reliable supply, and
be cost competitive with fossil jet fuel.
Also, it is important that producing
sustainable aviation fuels does
not require more energy than they
generate, and therefore more carbon
emissions than they save. Fuels must
98 Energ y
Ne w s
meet or exceed the same technical
performance and safety standards as
petroleum fuels. Fuels must have the
right level of volatility, stability, lubricity,
fluidity, non-corrosivity, electrical
conductivity, sterility and particulate
content. ‘Fuels’ are also used as
hydraulic fluid in engine control
systems and as coolant for certain
fuel system components. Sustainable
aviation fuels must therefore have
the required thermal properties and
viscosity for this use. To ensure
aviation fuel has the required
properties, it must be blended with at
least 50% petroleum jet fuel.
Sustainable aviations fuels must
also use the same infrastructure
for transmission, distribution, and
dispensing as petroleum fuels. The
mixes must be able to be placed into
fuel tanks with other fuel blends and
not pose problems. This creates fuel
handling issues.
In Australia, there are two critical
elements in the production process
that are missing – feedstock and a
refinery to process them. It has been
suggested that the Shell Clyde refinery
may provide the plant (and workforce)
required to make sustainable aviation
fuels production possible. However,
finding sufficient quantity of affordable
and sustainably produced feedstock
at a commercial scale is more difficult.
Government policy has a role to play
in supporting the development of an
advanced industry in Australia, as it
has done for biodiesel and renewable
electricity. However, there are issues
regarding what form this support may
take.
Sustainable aviation fuels in Australia
have already taken off, literally, in a
Qantas jet that flew return Sydney to
Adelaide. This proves that the fuel is
technically viable.
Report by Nyrie Palmer FAIE, Senior
Project Officer, NSW Resources and
Energy
M o re to Ku r n ell t h a n
ho rses , m ad men a n d
p uberty
Report on site visit to the Caltex petroleum refinery on 12 July 2013 by Matt Stevens, government relations and
public affairs consultant
About 20 Young Energy Professionals (YEPs) recently discovered that the Cronulla shire’s Kurnell Peninsula
is renowned for more than being the setting for some of Australia’s most iconic cinematic scenes. The Caltex
petroleum refinery is a stone’s throw from the Cronulla sand dunes, on which scenes from the films 40,000
Horsemen (1940), Puberty Blues (1985) and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome (1985) were shot. Scenes from the
video clip for the patriotic-cum-plagiarised anthem Down Under (1981) by Men at Work were also filmed on the
dunes, and the Puberty Blues franchise returned to Kurnell for its 2012 television series.
Perhaps the coming-of-age theme is apt for the revelatory
journey that these 20-odd YEPs undertook through their
excursion across the River George. It is also applicable to
the metamorphosis that the refinery is undergoing.
Last September, Caltex confirmed that it would convert
the Kurnell refinery into a major petroleum import terminal
from late 2014. This followed a review finding that Caltex’s
refineries had operating losses in recent years.
Caltex cited the relative smallness and outdated
configuration of its refineries as disadvantageous, in
comparison to their competitors in Asia with modern, larger
and more efficient facilities. Conversion to a fuel terminal is
considered the solution.
The existing facility sees crude oil refined into petrol, diesel,
jet fuel and fuel oil, as well as producing by-products such
as sulphur and LPG. Ships deliver crude oil to the refinery
not far from Captain Cook’s 1770 landing place.
The future terminal will allow similar products to those
currently refined at the site to be imported instead, then
pumped into product tanks, before being distributed to
other terminals via Caltex’s fuel product pipelines. While
the shipping volume is not projected to change, Caltex is
seeking NSW Government approval to carry out upgrades
and dredging at its Kurnell berthing facilities. The kilometrelong wharf attached to the refinery has been in service
since 1956. Dredging was last carried out at the wharf when
it was constructed in the 1950s and at the sub berth in
1969. This proposed dredging would remove sediment that
has accumulated over 40 years.
Caltex claims that the conversion to a fuel import terminal
would see less traffic, due to by-products no longer being
distributed by truck, as well as fewer people working at
the site. Noise, odours and light would also decrease.
The NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure is
overseeing the environmental assessment of Caltex’s
terminal conversion proposal, including impact upon water
and air quality, flora and fauna, and Indigenous and other
heritage. The final stage of conversion would include the
shut down and demolition of the refinery process units and
site remediation.
While union leaders have decried the axing of around 300
Caltex jobs at the Kurnell site, a number of contracting firms
will see an increase in activity for the conversion process,
which will naturally taper off, as the work is completed.
A number of workers have been employed at Kurnell
for decades, following the establishment of housing for
low-income families during the Great Depression, during
which time the shanty town was known as Happy Valley.
The Sutherland Shire rejected Caltex’s 1951 initial refinery
proposal, as a desecration of Captain Cook’s landing place.
Construction eventually began in 1953, with over 3000 men
on site at its peak, many of them Dutch labourers.
Given that a number of the YEPs on the bus tour are
normally trapped behind a desk every day, it was an
enlightening experience for all, to get an insider’s view of a
piece of Australian industrial history, at a culturally historic
location. The issues arising from the refinery’s conversion
to an import terminal cover various aspects of mass fuel
distribution; from science and engineering, to economics,
energy security, regulation, and environmental and cultural
protection. While the refinery has been an industrial
icon for this area that has witnessed several memorable
developments in Australian culture, its operators have
decided that it’s time for the facility to transform for its next
life stage.
Like the doting parents of a gawky teenager emerging from
the awkwardness of pubescence, Caltex’s stewardship of
its Kurnell terminal conversion will determine whether the
site achieves its potential in maturity or otherwise.
En e r g y
Ne w s 99
NSW Lo o m i ng G a s S h o r t a ge:
Fact o r fi c t i o n ?
Half-day symposium* hosted by AIE Sydney Branch on 24 June 2013
Speakers:
Andrew Lewis, Executive Director of Energy, and Jock
Laurie, Land and Water Commissioner, NSW Trade and
Investment, were joined by:
Phil Barresi, CEO, Energy Users Association of Australia
(EUAA)
Lucy Carter, Energy Fellow, Grattan Institute
Damian Dwyer, Director, Australian Petroleum Production
and Exploration Association (APPEA)
Katrina Groshinski, Partner, MinterEllison Lawyers
David Green, Pipelines Manager – Commercial & Business
Development, Jemena
Andrew McManus, Vice President – Energy Consulting,
Australasia, Wood Mackenzie
Summary prepared by Nyrie Palmer FAIE, Senior
Project Officer, NSW Resources and Energy
New South Wales is dependent on other states for 95% of
its gas needs, lea ving New South Wales vulnerable when
existing long-term contracts for gas imports from South
Figure 2: LNG global exports, 2000 and 2018
Source: Wood Mackenzie
much as 300% (EUAA). There may be some price relief
as domestic consumers reduce gas consumption by
increasing efficiency, switching to other energy sources or
changing their economic activities. We don't have a gas
shortage as much as gas being diverted to export and
prices approaching international parity.
Reduction in gas consumption is not the best outcome.
Gas plays a significant role in regional development,
providing new jobs and strengthening and diversifying
Figure 1: Gas imports to New South Wales
Source: National Gas Market Bulletin Board, 2013 (via APPEA)
Australia and Victoria come to an end in 2016 (Figure 1).
In the past, Eastern Australia was sheltered from
international gas markets and prices; however, this is
changing. LNG developments in Queensland are enabling
gas contacts to be written with Asian customers, and soon
Eastern Australian demand and prices will be driven by
exports. According to Wood Mackenzie, by 2018, Australia
will be the largest exporter of LNG (Figure 2).
The global demand for Eastern Australian gas will
inevitably increase domestic prices more in line with higher
international prices (Figure 3). Estimates of the increase
vary from 32% (APPEA) to 80% (Grattan Institute), and as
100 Energ y
Ne w s
Figure 3: Contracted gas prices
Source: Grattan Institute
regional economies. Gas is an important feedstock for
industry as well as a source of energy. It supports our
electricity market and is used to address the variability of
renewable generation such as wind and solar. Gas also
reduces electricity demand, avoiding the need for more
expensive electricity infrastructure. Gas is also lower in
greenhouse emissions than coal. One possible outcome
of increased gas prices is that coal will remain the primary
fuel for electricity generation. Perversely, by preventing the
development of gas reserves, opponents may be indirectly
supporting an increase in greenhouse emissions by
squeezing out gas-fired generation in favour of coal-fired
Figure 5: Regulatory objectives
Source: MinterEllison Lawyers
generation. The Grattan Institute indicated that there could
be no new gas-fired generation for at least the next ten
years.
Phil Barresi, CEO, EUAA
The topic of the AIE symposium was whether there is a
looming ‘gas shortage’ in New South Wales. However, there
are plenty of gas reserves. EUAA stated that 85% of current
2P reserves are from coal seam gas (CSG). However, New
South Wales has lost investment opportunities to develop
CSG due to public demand for the protection of agricultural
land and water resources. A number of projects have been
suspended due to regulatory uncertainty, and community
concerns are slowing down the progress of exploration
and development. Metgasco suspended exploration and
development activity in New South Wales; in the Hunter
Valley, Dart Energy has put all activities on ‘care and
maintenance’; and AGL has suspended Camden expansion
plans (Wood Mackenzie). Santos now has the dominant
position of being the only major producer of gas in New
South Wales.
The symposium identified that increasing pipeline capacity
could be the key to providing additional supply to New
South Wales (Figure 4). Jemena is planning to expand
the Eastern Gas Pipeline (EGP) from a capacity of 106
to 130 PJ per year, and considering the merits of an
interconnected gas transmission system on the east coast.
Andrew Lewis said that it is a priority for the government in
New South Wales to secure local gas supplies that support
the economy while ensuring measures to protect health
and environmental impacts from domestic exploration
and production. The state government has announced
a strategic land use policy and has appointed a new
Land and Water Commissioner whose role is to oversee
regulation, exploration, and land access agreements
between landholders and gas producers (Figure 5).
Figure 4: East coast infrastructure
Source: Jemena
* AIE Sydney Branch thanks MinterEllison Lawyers and
Jemena for their generous sponsorship of this
symposium.
En e r g y
Ne w s 101
Jemena and t h e e a s t c o a st
ga s transmissi o n s y s t em
Interview with David Green, Pipelines Manager – Commercial & Business Development, Jemena, by Nyrie Palmer,
Senior Project Officer, NSW Resources and Energy on 24 June 2013
Following AIE Sydney Branch’s
half-day forum on the topic, “NSW
Looming Gas Shortage: Fact or
fiction?”, I asked David Green
about the changes in the east
coast gas industry and Jemena’s
place in Australia’s gas future.
Q.What is your role with Jemena?
A. I joined Jemena in 2007
after almost 10 years in the
petrochemicals industry in
engineering, commercial and
business strategy roles. I have
been responsible for managing the
Jemena’s pipelines group for three
years. Jemena’s pipeline portfolio
includes the Eastern Gas Pipeline
(EGP), Queensland Gas Pipeline
(QGP), VicHub Interconnect and
the Colongra Lateral Pipeline, all
of which Jemena fully owns and
manages.
David Green
between the Gippsland Basin
and New South Wales, where is
supplies more than half of the
gas consumed. The pipeline is
well located to meet the growing
demand for natural gas in New
South Wales from residential,
industrial and commercial
customers, particularly as the
supply dynamics on the east
coast change. The EGP supplies
gas to a number of regional gas
distribution networks including
the Jemena Natural Gas Network,
which distributes gas to more than
1.1 million homes and businesses.
Industrial and commercial users
include Bluescope Steel at Port
Kembla, Marubeni’s power station
at Smithfield, Alinta Energy’s
Bairnsdale power station and
EnergyAustralia’s power station at
Tallawarra.
Since 2007 the Jemena team has
completed a number of major
pipeline projects namely the
addition of a midline compressor
station near Mila in New South
Wales and the installation of a
fourth compressor at Longford
in Victoria. Additionally in 2010,
in response to the economic and
industrial growth in the Gladstone
region, Jemena invested more
than A$100 million in expanding
the QGP and doubling its
capacity to 52 PJ per annum via
113 kilometres of looping and
the installation of two midline
compressors.
Q.What are Jemena’s activities in
gas transmission?
A. Jemena operates approximately
1,500 kilometres of gas
transmission pipelines and
associated facilities throughout
Queensland, New South Wales
and Victoria.
EGP is a key supply artery
102 Energ y
Ne w s
VicHub is an interconnect
facility situated at the Longford
Compressor Station. VicHub
enables gas to flow bi-directionally
between the EGP and the Victorian
gas transmission system. VicHub
has a nominal daily capacity of 150
TJ per day for injections into the
Victorian market and 135 TJ per
day for withdrawals from Victoria,
subject to associated rights for
receipt or delivery on the EGP.
The QGP links the Wallumbilla gas
hub in south central Queensland
to large industrial gas users in
Gladstone and Rockhampton. Built
in 1989, the QGP has a design life
of 50 years and a remaining life of
27 years. Its capacity was doubled
in 2010 to 52 PJ/annum. The
QGP supplies gas to commercial
and industrial customers such
as Queensland Alumina, Rio
Tinto, Orica, Boyne Smelter and
Queensland Magnesia. Gas
is also supplied to the retail
distribution networks of Gladstone,
Rockhampton and Wide Bay.
Jemena designed and built the
Colongra Lateral Pipeline to deliver
gas to Delta Electricity’s new 600
MW gas-fired peaking power
station and to store enough gas to
allow the power station to run at full
capacity for five hours. One major
innovation involved double looping
the largest diameter gas pipeline
ever used in Australia (42 inches)
to create this storage capacity.
Another project highlight was fine
tolerance in design, procurement
and construction used to withstand
high fatigue and mine subsidence
in the area.
Q.How is Jemena expanding its
transmission capabilities?
A. Jemena is currently aggregating
loads for an expansion of EGP
with the addition of two new
compressors that we expect to
commit to later this year. It is
anticipated that this next stage
of expansion will increase the
pipeline’s total capacity from 106
PJ per annum to 130 PJ and will
take approximately two years.
There is also the capability to
loop the EGP in the future should
demand exceed the expansion
plans that are under consideration.
Jemena recently entered an
agreement to expand QGP, with
commissioning expected in 2015.
A front-end engineering and design
(FEED) study is currently underway
and Jemena hopes to pursue other
pre-FEED and FEED studies over
the next couple of years.
Q.A recent AIE seminar asked if
the looming gas shortage in New
South Wales was fact or fiction
because the state relies for most
of its gas on the Cooper and the
Gippsland Basins. Do you think
that the large LNG projects in
Queensland will have a major
impact on supply in New South
Wales with more gas being drawn
to the north and, if so, what do
you see as the possible solution
to this?
Jemena agrees with the view that
the Queensland LNG projects
will have an impact on domestic
supply in the next few years.
Domestic demand is competing
with LNG exports, which in
turn could result in significant
reductions in gas flowing from
Cooper Basin to New South Wales.
This is coupled with community
concerns about coal seam gas
(CSG) and their impact on the
development of new sources of
supply in NSW. Jemena believes
that it is important to bring the
most cost-efficient delivered gas to
market and considers expanding
the EGP to increase the flows of
gas from Victoria will be a key part
of meeting our demand for natural
gas. The challenge – not just for
New South Wales but for the whole
of the east coast of Australia – is
to ensure that there is access
to as broad a supply of gas as
possible from as many sources as
possible. This way Australia can
not only benefit from the export of
gas to overseas markets but also
continue to enjoy using natural gas
in domestic markets. This means
establishing efficient approval
processes for gas developments
not adding onerous layers of
approvals. Jemena is working on
solutions with customers to expand
the EGP to enable more gas to
flow north to meet any shortfall.
Q.At the AIE seminar, you talked
about an interconnected east
coast gas transmission system.
Can you provide more details of
this and why do you think this
is necessary? Is this part of the
solution to higher gas prices
and/or supply challenges on the
east coast?
A. An interconnected east coast gas
transmission system would provide
supply solutions to help manage
current and future market changes.
Specifically, there is an opportunity
to introduce greater competition
and efficiency to the transmission
market on the east coast of
Australia. A directly interconnected
east coast not only facilitates
improved and additional flows from
existing basins but also opens up
new sources of supply to the New
South Wales market. This could be
achieved by connecting the QGP
to the EGP.
Gas prices are rising because of
the increased costs of getting gas
out of the ground and because
there appears to be a shortfall
in supply for a period of time
around the commissioning of
the Gladstone LNG facilities.
Increasing gas supply and then
bringing this gas to market is
critical to bringing downward
pressure to gas pricing.
An interconnected east coast gas
transmission system could have
a key role to play in ensuring that
all players in the Australian gas
industry – from power generators
and manufacturers to small
businesses and households – are
able to benefit from access to this
abundant resource. Australia has
a plentiful supply of natural gas so
we will need the right policies to
ensure all Australians benefit from
both the export of natural gas and
the domestic use of natural gas.
En e r g y
Ne w s 103
Article
Ti me to Reco n s i d e r
Nucle ar E ne r g y
P oli c y
By Jonathan O’Dea MP,
Chairman, NSW Public
Accounts Committee,
Member for Davidson
(Liberal, NSW)
This article is published in EnergyNews to promote discussion and debate, and responsibility for the content rests with
the author.
The global energy mission
Solving the world’s energy conundrum – satisfying the
growing global energy appetite affordably and safely – is a
great mission for our age. Achieving this without creating
bigger problems in the process will not be easy, fast or
cheap. Politicians are wrong to submit this to short-term
thinking or an election cycle; energy policy will only benefit
from an honest, rigourous and long-term approach.
World electricity demand has more than tripled in 30 years
and will keep growing into the foreseeable future. Even
though Australia already generates more electricity – and
greenhouse gas emissions – per head of population than
any other nation, our needs too are increasing. While the
global financial crisis, high dollar and rising prices have
somewhat dampened Australia’s energy demand, they
have not broken trend growth. We are on track to need 50%
more power in 2020 than we did in 2005.i
We can partially reduce our energy demands and improve
our energy efficiency using new technology in, for example,
meters, buildings, light bulbs and cars; but these measures
will never be enough. Within a decade, we are going to
need 1 GW of new power generation every year, or face
large-scale blackouts on a regular basis. If we wait to solve
this problem, it may be too late.
Fossil fuels: today’s problems, yesterday’s
technologies
For some time yet the world will rely broadly on fossil
fuels (peat, coal, oil and natural gas). At the moment they
supply an unsustainable 80% of global electricity. Even if
fossil fuels were endlessly available, they will not always be
cheap and were never risk-free.
Carbon dioxide (CO2) is harmless and necessary to life in
naturally occurring amounts, but additional manmade CO2
is undeniably contributing to damage of our oceans and
atmosphere. Every tonne of coal burned to make electricity
puts two tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. Coal-fired
power also releases airborne acid gas and metals such as
lead, arsenic and mercury in dangerous concentrations.ii
Natural gas is lauded as a cleaner alternative, but it also
produces a tonne of CO2 for every tonne of gas in power
generation.
Even more alarmingly, fossil fuel exploration, mining,
transport and pollution contribute to, if not cause directly,
at least tens of thousands of deaths every year. iii While
production accident rates in many countries are much
104 Energ y
Ne w s
lower than they were, they remain far from insignificant.
The price of fossil fuel is rising too. Partly because of
rising supply-side levers, but also because of government
imposed carbon penalties. In 2011, three respected centreright economists costed coal’s pollution damage in the
United States and found it outweighed the entire industry’s
positive economic value.iv
In summary, we tolerate the relative convenience of fossil
fuels because:
• they mostly satisfy our baseload needsv
• for the time being they are relatively cheap and available
• the damage they have historically caused has not been
obvious to the broader population.
But tolerance is wearing thin.
The limited power of renewables
Renewables offer substantial hope; but to realise that hope
we must overcome significant geographical, technical
and cost challenges. Hydropower, for example, provides
16% of world base load power and some nations use it to
generate well beyond half their electricity needs. The key is
that those nations have either the Amazon River or massive
glaciers passing through. Geothermal, wind, solar, wave
and tide energy present comparatively similar limitations.
Biomass is a promising fuel source; but with substantial
technological and logistical challenges to becoming a
reliable base load supplier.
The nuclear attraction
Nuclear energy is a proven supplier of secure, reliable
and affordable base load power. Nuclear power plants
are comparatively expensive to build, though relatively
inexpensive to operate and maintain. With more than 50
years development and improvement behind them, new
generation reactors are also demonstrably more efficient,
longer lasting and safer than early ones. To produce
the same quantity of electricity as coal, nuclear releases
between 10 and 100 times less CO2, making it as clean
in the atmosphere as hydropower. Nuclear requires far
fewer mining, transport and other workers than coal does
because, in routine operation, one tonne of natural uranium
can produce the same electrical energy as 20,000 tonnes
of coal. This results in fewer and smaller mining effects,
including accidents. Additional environmental radiation in
the vicinity of an operating nuclear reactor is less detectable
than the increase in radiation surrounding a coal-fired
power plant. No such radiation levels are considered
dangerous. These statements are experienced facts, not
opinions.
Intensive research and development in small modular
reactors – as used by a number of the world’s navies –
along with generation IV reactors and thorium reactors is
likely to improve flexibility for use in small national grids and
remote locations, as well as enhancing safety and waste
reduction. Nuclear fusion may also at some point become
an option, though this is unlikely before 2030.
What about the risks?
Questions and concerns about nuclear power range from
economics to safety and security. Meltdown, accident,
pollution or ‘weaponisation’ can have frightening
consequences. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and
Fukushima are salient and dirty reminders – as is Australia’s
Maralinga – of potential dangers. (It is wrong to associate
Maralinga with power generation, but it touches issues of
public perception and trust relating to nuclear pollution,
waste and safety.)
At Three Mile Island, in the United States in 1979, design
flaws, mechanical failures and operator errors combined to
create a dangerous situation, which never became deadly
because neither the steel reactor vessel nor its concrete
containment unit were breached. Later site surveys
found a barely perceptible and deemed safe increase in
background radiation – smaller than you would experience
being x-rayed.
Chernobyl offered no such protection. Fifty to sixty people
died in 1986 as a direct result of a meltdown and another
4,000 people may yet die of radiation-caused cancers. In
hindsight we know the reactor was badly designed, badly
built, badly operated and badly monitored.
Following Fukushima, more than 100,000 people had to be
evacuated to escape the radiation danger. Land and facility
remediation will be expensive. Nations are rightly reviewing
their nuclear programs. Italy and Germany have announced
plans to curtail their nuclear dependence. Yet independent
analysis highlights that Fukushima’s operator TEPCO ought
to have better understood and more accurately modelled
tsunami threats and been held to tighter account by the
regulator NISA. It might have if NISA had been adequately
independent of industry and government agencies
promoting nuclear power. The United Nations will receive its
final report on the disaster later this year.
Considering these deplorable events, some possibly
surprising facts nonetheless stand out. In each case,
reactor damage was the avoidable result of failure to follow
known best practices and standards. Modern reactors
rely on ‘defense-in-depth’, in which backup system after
backup builds on successive backups. If power or other
components fail, including due to an earthquake and
tsunami, the danger will reduce and be contained rather
than accelerate and spread. In theory and in practice this
makes the probability of disaster extremely small. Further,
over its entire history, nuclear power generation – including
accidents – has caused far fewer deaths and injuries than
occur in any single year because of coal, oil and gas.viii
What about nuclear waste? The amounts are relatively
small and manageable, but new ways of containing
spent nuclear fuel are also in construction. Sweden and
Finland, for example, are building final deep repositories
in ‘unwatered’ stable bedrock that will be able to withstand
worst case scenarios including earthquakes and an ice
age. New technologies also increasingly reuse waste as a
further fuel source. On the issue of weapons, no weapons
grade ore would ever be required to run a reactor in
Australia. The issues of reactor protections and security are
well understood and would necessarily be part of any tight
operational, regulatory and policing environment.
Australia’s isolated policy
While every energy source has advantages and risks,
in Australia we treat nuclear energy mainly as a threat.
This is evident in that it is against the law. Specifically,
the regulator ARPANSA (Australian Radiation Protection
and Nuclear Safety Agency) will not – indeed cannot –
license the construction or operation of a nuclear power
plant, a nuclear fuel fabrication plant, an enrichment plant
or a reprocessing facility. Further, the Commonwealth
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act
1999 (section 140a) roundly prohibits the construction of
nuclear power plants. It is no surprise that nuclear never
got a mention under the previous Labor-Green alliance.
That said, relaxing state-based exploration laws has led to
increased uranium discovery and potential export, so that
Australia has become the world’s third biggest exporter.ix
Selling but not using uranium is a confused and possibly
out-of-date stance. Australia, New Zealand, Iceland and
Israel are the only countries in the OECD group of 34
nations prohibiting nuclear power. France sources three
quarters of its domestic electricity from nuclear power
and Ukraine nearly half. The United States, Canada, the
United Kingdom, South Africa, South Korea and others all
have substantial, long-standing programs. China and India
are heavily investing in nuclear power. According to the
World Nuclear Association, 435 nuclear power plants in
30 countries generate more than 20% of OECD electricity
and 13% of world electricity.x Internationally, 65 reactors
are under construction and 167 more are in planning
stages. These do not include the hundreds of other nuclear
reactors in university and research facilities, on ships and
submarines and in making medical isotopes.xi
Negative, not necessarily informed,
sentiment
Many Australians would probably agree with the statement,
“nuclear energy is dangerous”. On the question of how
dangerous, most of us are less able to answer clearly. Coal,
oil and gas are certainly involve dangers. Renewables,
despite much enthusiasm, are not about to get us out of
Nuclear power plant, Dukovany, Czech Republic
Source: Wikipedia Commons; image by Petr Adamek, October 2005
En e r g y
Ne w s 105
trouble in a hurry. Yet it seems that we avoid having to
discuss nuclear because of our absolute legislative barrier,
which makes considering use of the technology futile.
We need quality information on the table, not superficial
data and emotive impressions. Experience suggests that
consideration of up-to-date information matures outlooks
quickly.
To be clear, I am not advocating for nuclear technology. I
am advocating a discussion, starting with and facilitated by
overdue state and federal legislative reviews. This would
enable broad, open, reasoned and pragmatic investigation
and discussion of nuclear power generation.
Unblocking a ridiculous legal situation
Previous governments have taken significant steps to
understand and consider nuclear energy. A bipartisan
parliamentary inquiry chaired by Geoff Prosser in 2006
found that, “For the generation of continuous, reliable
supplies of electricity on a large scale, the only alternative
to fossil fuels is nuclear power. Nuclear plants offer very low
operating costs, security of energy supply and electricity
price stability. Nuclear power is cost competitive with gas
and coal-fired electricity generation in many industrialised
countries.”xii
At the end of 2006, the Uranium Mining, Processing
and Nuclear Energy Review Taskforce, headed by Dr
Ziggy Switkowski, also reported positively on nuclear
opportunities. It considered nuclear energy to be practical,
sustainable and – at the time – able to be delivered within
10–15 years. The taskforce also criticised complex,
overlapping state and federal regulations for inhibiting
industry efficiency and suggested simplifying the
regulations.
The Howard Liberal Government said it would encourage
the nuclear industry – seeing it as potentially viable even
before a carbon penalty was in place. That government
committed to policies repealing prohibition and supporting
mining, research, new technologies including generation
IV reactors, skills increase and public communication.
When Labor took office in late 2007, the work on nuclear
options ceased and the focus shifted to climate change and
emission reduction policies.
The NSW Public Accounts Committee, which I chair,
considered nuclear energy in our 2012 Energy Inquiry.
We sought out and listened to experienced opinions, took
on fresh knowledge and consulted democratic citizen
juries. We found nuclear options to present real and
possible advantages and opportunities. The New South
Wales Parliament recently relaxed laws to allow uranium
exploration and mining — as earlier recommended by
Prosser — and the Resources Minister Chris Hartcher
declared the state open to expressions of interest. Yet all
the states remain stymied by federal legislative complexity,
confusion and blocking that puts a lid on discussion by
banning any relevant development.
Conclusions and recommendations
New energy technologies take time to develop and
implement. Australia will suffer significant energy shortfalls
over time, increased costs and greater pollution unless
new technologies disrupt the trends. It makes no sense
for governments to arbitrarily rule out any form of power
generation. Yet that is exactly what we have done to nuclear
energy, which is relied on around the world to safely and
106 Energ y
Ne w s
effectively generate base load electricity. Governments at
every level must work together and make sure legislation
does not block possible answers to pressing problems. If
we ultimately choose to reject nuclear, it should be for valid
reasons, whether financial, pragmatic or technical, rather
than based on emotional, outdated notions and confused,
irrelevant policy that panders to short-termism, hysteria and
lack of political courage.
References
iUranium Mining, Processing and Nuclear Energy Review.
Chapter 4. “Electricity generation.” p.45
ii
American Lung Association. Toxic Air: The Case for
Cleaning Up Coal-fired Power Plants. March 2011. http://
www.lung.org/assets/documents/healthy-air/toxic-air-report.
pdf
iii The World Health Organisation attributes more than two
million premature deaths a year to outdoor air pollution.
The most significant contributing factors are transport and
industrial burning, of which fossil fuel power generation is
the major component. See Preventing Disease Through
Healthy Environments: Exposure to Air Pollution, A Major
Public Health Concern, 2010. http://www.who.int/ipcs/
features/air_pollution.pdf. Also, the American Lung
Association paper Toxic Air: The Case for Cleaning Up
Coal-fired Power Plants, March 2011, points to an array of
harms and health risks associated with coal burning. www.
LungUSA.org/ToxicAirReport.
iv Muller, Nicholas Z., Robert Mendelsohn, and William
Nordhaus. 2011. "Environmental Accounting for Pollution in
the United States Economy." American Economic Review,
101(5): 1649-75.
v
Baseload is the energy industry term for the power needed
to supply society all day, every day.
vi The heat value of black Australian coal is 25.5 MJ/kg and
the heat value of natural uranium in a light water reactor is
500 GJ/kg. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Facts-andFigures/Heat-values-of-various-fuels/#.UT015Nb_O8A
vii W. Alex Gabbard, “Coal Combustion: Nuclear Resource or
Danger?” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a research facility
of the US Department of Energy, run by the University of
Tennessee and Battelle Memorial Institute. http://www.ornl.
gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html
viii For a complete fuel chain analysis see Nuclear power and
the environment: comparative assessment of environmental
and health impacts of electricity-generating systems in
Applied Energy 65 (2000) 211±229 by S.M. Rashad*,
F.H. Hammad. http://www.ewp.rpi.edu/hartford/~odells2/
EP/Other/references/Nuclearpowerandtheenvironment,c
omparativeassessmentofenvironmentalandhealthimpact
sofelectricity-generatingsystems.pdf. A simplified Death
per TWh claim is that for every person killed by nuclear
power generation, 4,000 die due to coal, adjusted for the
same amount of power produced. See Seth Godin, Ubermarketer and best-selling author. http://sethgodin.typepad.
com/seths_blog/2011/03/the-triumph-of-coal-marketing.
html
ix Utz, Uranium Mining and Nuclear Fuel Policy in Australia.
[The Update of October 2012 is now withdrawn, due to an
error claiming Australia may become the biggest exporter
in 2013.] We have the world’s highest proportion of known
recoverable uranium resource, at some 31 per cent and
seven of the world’s 20 biggest ore deposits are on our
continent.
x
International Energy Agency, Key World Energy Statistics.
p. 24 has nuclear generating 12.9 per cent of 2010’s
worldwide 21,431 Terrawatt Hours. This is equivalent to
nearly half the entire world’s 1973 generation of electricity.
xi World Nuclear Association. http://www.world-nuclear.org/
Nuclear-Basics/Global-number-of-nuclear-reactors/#.
UT1dNY7vbzI
xii The Australian Parliament’s so-called “Prosser Inquiry”,
p.142-3. See References.
B OOK REVIEW
Clima te Cha n g e
Eth i cs: N av ig a t i n g
t h e pe rfect m o r a l
stor m
By Donald A. Brown, earthscan from Routledge; 2012; hardback, soft
cover or ebook; ISBN 978-0-415-62572-2; 271 pages; £26.99 (ebook and
soft cover), £90.00 (hardback); www.routledge.com
Donald Brown, Scholar in Residence
on Sustainability Ethics and Law at
Widener University School of Law
in the United States starts from an
acceptance of the ‘consensus’ view on
climate change:
• the planet is heating up due to
human actions
• the consequences of this, under
business-as-usual, are dire
particularly for some of the world’s
poorest people in the short to
medium term, and for most of
humanity later this century
• some people are causing this
problem much more than others
and those who are most vulnerable
can do almost nothing to reduce
the threat
• to prevent great harms, hard-toimagine global policy responses
are required
• the chance of these conclusions
being wrong, although not 100%
certain, is increasingly improbable.
The ethical dimension is that hundreds
of millions of the world’s poorest
people are most vulnerable to climate
change’s harshest impacts, and these
same people have done little to cause
the problem. The author asserts
that this ethical dimension has been
largely ignored in the 35-year debate.
Before tackling the ethical issues, Mr
Brown first argues the case for why
ethics matter. Not only is a finding
a global solution to climate change
the ‘right’ thing to do, it should be a
morally acceptable solution. Further,
moral arguments make a positive
contribution to bringing about social
change.
Although there are other books
about the ethics of climate change,
“… the previous climate change
literature has focused on ethical
analysis of significant climate change
issues rather than on the ethical
problems with specific positions
taken by disputants in climate change
debates … climate change must be
understood essentially as an ethical
problem because of the gravity of the
problem and the strong likelihood of
an inadequate and unjust response
if there is a widespread failure to
respond to climate change’s ethical
dimensions”.
The rather long introduction includes
a chapter on the history of the climate
change debate since the mid-1970s
to identify the dominant arguments
for and against climate change laws,
policies and programs. I found this
chapter very helpful in putting the
current situation in perspective.
Part II deals with and prioritises
climate change ethical issues in seven
chapters covering: cost arguments;
scientific uncertainty; atmospheric
targets; allocation national emissions
targets; responsibility for damages
and adaptation costs; obligations
of governments, organisations,
businesses and individuals; and the
independent responsibility to act.
make ethical considerations influential
in guiding a global solution to climate
change.
This book appealed to me because I
believe that ethics matter. Macquarie
Dictionary defines ‘ethics’ as a
system of moral principles, by which
human actions and proposals may be
judged good or bad or right or wrong.
Ethics should guide us in academia,
commerce, industry and government.
Australian readers will find the chapter
on the independent responsibility to
act of particular interest. The fact that
as a nation our total contribution to
global greenhouse gas emissions
is negligible is sometimes used to
justify not taking action. Donald Brown
reminds us of our ethical duty to act in
way that prevents harm to others and
not to ignore the benefits to others of
taking the right action.
As Dr John Lemons, Professor
Emeritus of Biology and Environmental
Science, University of New England,
says in the Preface, “… (this book)
provides convincing arguments
and examples of why solutions to
anthropogenic global climate change
must be explicitly framed, not on
abstract and theoretical levels – as
too many academics consistently
do – but rather on practical levels,
so that public policy makers and
others understand the concrete
value-laden and ethical implications
and simultaneously understand that
polices must be understood as having
ethical consequences, good or bad,
depending on what is embedded in
them.”
Part III discusses the crucial role
of ethics in climate change policy
making, asking “Why has ethics failed
to achieve traction?” and concluding
with recommendations on how to
Joy Claridge FAIE
Editor AIE
En e r g y
Ne w s 107
Membership mat ters
Our Vi s i o n –
L eade rs hi p i n E n e r g y
OUR MISSION – TO PROMOTE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING AND AWARENESS
OF ENERGY ISSUES AS A CONTRIBUTION TO THE IMPROVED USE OF ENERGY TECHNOLOGY
AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSIBLE ENERGY POLICIES
M ake s u r e y o u v i s i t
o ur ne w w e b s i t e a t
www.aie.org.au
To access the latest EnergyNews online, your membership details and other 'Members only' information,
go to the Members Area and sign in.
It's easy to sign in – you just need the email address you use for AIE membership and your password.
Select a password that you commonly use.
If you cannot recall your current sign-in details, there are links to receive a temporary password to access
your account. Alternatively you can contact our Secretariat on free call 1800 629 945 where Chris is
always happy to help.
108 Energ y
Ne w s
NEW MEMBERS
NEW INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS
NAMEGRADEBRANCH
NAMEGRADEBRANCH
Mr Christopher Bartley
Student
South Australia
Mr Ben Maddern
Member
South Australia
Dr Grant Caffery
Associate
Perth
Dr Aghaegbuna Ozumba
Associate
Overseas
Miss Gabriella Cesile
Graduate
Tasmania
Mr Jeffrey Packer
Member
South Australia
Mr Sean Dean
Student
Perth
Ms Praema Ranga
Student
Brisbane
Ms Jade Fennell
Graduate
Sydney
Ms Jessica Shaw
Member
Perth
Mr Sam Forrest
Member
Sydney
Ms Rachael Smith
Member
Perth
Mr Supratik Ghosh
Student
Melbourne
Mr James Sobey
Graduate
South Australia
Mr David Hawkins
Member
Sydney
Mr Julian Soo
Associate
Melbourne
Dr Alan Henderson
Member
Tasmania
Mr Lachlan Tait
Member
Perth
Miss Adele Howard
Graduate
Brisbane
Mr Tze Yen Tan
Student
Canberra
Mr David Taylor
Associate
Sydney
Mr Peter Hudson
Fellow
Perth
Mr Marnix Vunderink
Fellow
Brisbane
Miss Holly Hyder
Student
Melbourne
Mr Paul Weller
Graduate
South Australia
Miss Jenita Kinariwala
Member
Perth
Mr Paul Wentworth
Associate
Sydney
Dr Georgios Konstantinou
Graduate
Sydney
Ms Jane Wild
Associate
Sydney
Mr Cody Lin
Member
Melbourne
Mr Timothy Wong
Member
Perth
NEW CORPORATE MEMBERS
COMPANY NAMEREPRESENTATIVES
BRANCH
Australian Geothermal Solutions Pty Ltd
Mr Chris Booth
Melbourne
Mr Justin McFarlane
Melbourne
Ernst & Young
Mr Ian Rakich
Perth
Mr Andre Winarto
Perth
Muradel Pty Ltd
Mr Gerald Barker
South Australia
Mr David Lewis
South Australia
Oschatz Australia Pty Ltd
Mr Miroslav Utrata
Sydney
Western Australian Alternative Energy
Ms Sarah Barclay
Perth
Mr Simon Barclay
Perth
Skilled, experienced AIE Fellow
looking for the next career step.
Glen Currie FAIE
was turned on to energy in the role of Business Manager with CSIRO.
Since then, he has run two cleantech SMEs.
“I'm looking for a role in which I can use my well-developed consulting
and problem solving skills.”
To find out more about Glen and discuss any opportunities, you can contact him on:
0407 168 344
[email protected]
En e r g y
N e w s 109
Around the Branches
Brisbane
• Tony Irwin, Technical Director, SMR Nuclear Technology,
and Ian Lowe AO, President, ACF presented “Nuclear
Energy: Implications for Australia” at an event jointly
hosted by the IEEE Innovation Subcommittee on 15 July
2013.
Canberra
• David Millar, Technical Director–Renewable Energy,
AECOM, and Dr Nathan Steggel, Windlab, presented
“Wind Energy 2013: Technology and market update” on
24 September 2013.
Melbourne
• AIE Melbourne Branch and the Energy Institute at
the University of Melbourne hosted a free screening
of the movie “Switch–Discover the Future of Energy”
sponsored by Brown Coal Innovation Australia, on 11
July 2013.
• Dr Gill Owen, Research Program Leader – Consumers
and Energy Markets, Monash Sustainability Institute,
presented “A Walk on the Demand Side” on 18 July
2013.
• John Theunissen, Manager Network Modernisation, SP
AusNet, and David Prins, Director, Etrog Consulting,
presented “Smart Metering and Flexible Electricity
Pricing: Benefits and opportunities for customers and
the network” on 28 August 2013.
• David Green, CEO, Clean Energy Council,
presented “The Federal Election Result: What does
it mean for clean energy”, at the offices of sponsor
PricewaterhouseCoopers on 25 September 2013.
Perth
• AIE Perth Young Energy Professionals celebrated the
end of the financial year get-together on 18 July 2013.
• Martin Thomas, Chairman, Dulhunty Poles and APIC,
presented “Electricity Generation Trends: 2050 and
beyond” on 17 September 2013.
South Australia
• Peter Pudney, Senior Research Fellow, School of
Information Technology and Mathematical Sciences,
University of South Australia, presented “Low- Carbon
Mobility” on 17 July 2013.
• The SA Young Energy Professionals hosted “National
Electricity Rules: Back to basics” and “Renewable
Energy Target and Carbon Pricing Mechanism” in their
Winter Learning Series on 25 July 2013 and 22 August
2013 respectively.
• Lara Olsen, Head of Strategy, Australian Renewable
Energy Agency, presented an update on the agency on
8 August 2013.
• Michelle Groves, CEO, Australian Energy Regulator,
and Mark Henley, Energy Advocate, Uniting Care
Australia, presented “Consumer Engagement in Energy
Regulation” on 18 September 2013.
Sydney
• AIE Sydney Branch and the Australian Alliance to Save
Energy together hosted a half-day forum on “Smart
Meters in NSW: Hot technology or hot potato?” on 6
May 2013.
• Monique Alfris, Co-founder of Pollinate Energy,
presented at a fundraising event organized by AIE
Sydney Branch Young Energy Professionals on 30 May
2013.
• Flyn Van Ewijk, General Manager of Environment and
Sustainable Aviation Fuels, Qantas, and Dr Susan
Pond, Adjunct Professor of the Dow Sustainability
Program at the United States Studies Centre, presented
“The Future of Aviation Fuels in Australia” on 18 June
2013.
• Peter Munachen,
CEO & Director, North West Energy;
Phil Thick,
Managing Director, New Standard Energy;
and David Bradley,
Consultant & Owner, Gas Transport
Solutions, presented “New Gas: New hope for WA
consumers?” on 23 July 2013.
• AIE Sydney Branch hosted a half-day forum on “NSW
Looming Gas Shortage: Fact or fiction?” on 24 June
2013.
• AIE Perth Young Energy Professionals hosted “ Labor’s
Carbon Pricing Mechanism” on 30 July 2013.
• Doug Landfear, Manager Solar Development, AGL
Energy, and Elisabeth Tourneboeuf, Renewable Energy
Engineer & Project Manager, AECOM, presented
“Broken Hill and Nyngan Solar Plants: Solar goes large
scale” on 27 August 2013.
• AIE Perth Branch, in conjunction with the Western
Australia Office of Energy, hosted “Energy in WA
Conference 2013” on 21–22 August 2013.
110 Energ y
Ne w s
• AIE Sydney Branch Young Energy Professionals hosted
a site tour to the Caltex Kurnell Refinery on 12 July 2013.
Ready for Work
Energy professionals providing some light for the
next generation
The Ready for Work Mentoring Program has brought
together more than 200 students and sector professionals
from a great variety of disciplines and organisations across
three states.
Recognising the vast career and learning opportunities to
be gained from working in the sector, the Young Energy
Professionals and Young Pipeliners Forum designed
the mentoring program in 2012. The program has been
designed to help graduates find their dream job and to
help those already working in the sector to build leadership
skills and make a difference. A small team of volunteers
has coordinated the program across multiple states – Ian
Spence, Jenita Kinariwala, Sarah Clarke, Tim Vesey, Matt
Andel, Elle Bartnik, Sylvia Low and Benn Wheeler.
The program concept was trialed in Western Australia
last year and has since been launched in Victoria and
Queensland. While Victoria and Queenland are still in their
early phases, already the programs have been deemed a
great success, with some positive feedback from ‘mentees’
and mentors.
Thanks for organizing; it (opening event) was wonderful and
kudos to the organisers and coordinators!
Supratik Ghosh (a mentee)
It is great to give something back to the industry. My
‘mentee’ is a bright young man who has a great future
ahead of him. Thanks for organising this great initiative.
John Zammit (a mentor)
The Ready for Work Mentoring Program is a great example
of collaboration between universities, the energy industry
and undergraduate students. It creates opportunities for
developing networks, leadership and professional skills
and increasing awareness about the energy sector. The
program was launched in each state through opening
events with networking between mentoring pairs and guest
Tony Meechan, Melbourne mentor shares sector advice with mentee at
opening event, May 2013
presentations featuring ‘mentoring champions’ sharing
personal mentoring success stories.
Following their introductions at the launch, mentoring pairs
meet over a four-month period to discuss trends in the
energy industry and opportunities for employment. Four
newsletters are published during the program to guide the
mentoring relationship in:
• setting goals and achieving them
• CV and covering letter – marketing tools to strengthen
personal brand
• job hunting in the energy sector
• Workplace 101 – the need-to-know guide to working in
the energy sector.
While participation in the program does not guarantee
a direct employment opportunity, the real success of
the program it that it provides a platform for the energy
sector to gain a greater prominence in the mindset of new
graduates entering the employment market. Further, one of
the principal aims of the program was to act as a catalyst
for intelligent, bright young people to become involved in
the energy industry and early indications are that this has
been achieved.
The Ready for Work Mentoring Program is an initiative
of the Australian Institute of Energy’s Young Energy
Professionals and the Australian Pipeline Industry
Association’s Young Pipeliners Forum. Program sponsors
make essential contributions. So, thank you to:
Western Australia: DBP, DomGas Alliance, Verve Energy,
OSD, PIPEd, Energetics and Horizon Power
Victoria: SP AusNet and APA Group
Queensland: Origin Energy, APA Group and PIPEd
Two students networking at the Perth closing event, April 2013
For further information on the Ready for Work Mentoring
Program, please contact the YEP representative in your AIE
Branch.
En e r g y
Ne w s 111
OBITUARY
Vale
Norman Dalton AM FAIE
Norm Dalton’s many friends in the Institute will be sad to
hear of his passing on 14 August 2013, aged 89. Norm
was a member of the National Committee of the Australian
Membership of the Institute of Fuel at the time it separated
to form the Australian Institute of Energy in 1978. He
was foundation member number 330 and a Fellow. He
served for several years on the initial Committee of AIE's
Melbourne Group and was a strong influence in the early
formative years of the Institute. He remained an active and
interested member until his death.
Norm joined the State Electricity Commission of Victoria
(SECV) as an apprentice fitter at the Ballarat Power Station
in 1940 and retired 42 years later as Chief Engineer
Power, responsible for the development, construction and
commissioning of most of the thermal power generating
plant in Victoria. He completed part-time studies for
Diplomas in Electrical and Mechanical Engineering and a
Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical).
Following his retirement from the SECV, Norm worked for a
further 20 years with Lurgi Australia, and represented Lurgi
on the Board of the brown coal CRCs. He made a major
contribution to the installation by Lurgi of a novel steam
fluidised bed plant in Victoria for drying brown coal.
Away from energy, Norm was the leading tenor in St Paul’s
Cathedral choir for more than twenty years, and was much
sought-after to sing in other choirs such as the Victorian
Welsh Choir. He also had a long association with the youth
community service organisation Lord Somers Camp and
Power House. He was awarded the Camp Chief Award and
kept attending Camp until last year.
In 2002 he was awarded the Sir Willis Connolly Memorial
Medal by the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
jointly with the Barbarians. In 2009, Norm was awarded
a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) for “… service
to engineering, particularly through contributions to the
development, construction and commissioning of power
stations in Victoria, and to the community, particularly
through the Lord Somers Camp and Power House".
The Australian Institute of Energy expresses its
condolences to Norm's family. He will be fondly
remembered and sorely missed by his many friends in the
Institute and the power industry.
David Allardice FAIE
AIE B oard 2013
Board Members
Officers
PRESIDENT
Brian Truman (Perth Branch)
[email protected]
VICE-PRESIDENT
Mike Cochran
(South Australia Branch)
HON. SECRETARY
Paul McGregor (Sydney Branch)
[email protected]
HON. TREASURER
Peter Gorton* (Canberra Branch)
[email protected]
112 Energ y
Ne w s
OTHER DIRECTORS
Clare Anderson (Melbourne Branch)
John Blik (Sydney Branch)
Murray Meaton (Perth Branch)
Paul Riordan (South Australia Branch)
Tony Vassallo (Sydney Branch)
Andrew Dicks* (Brisbane Branch)
Peter Halyburton* (Newcastle Branch)
To be appointed* (Tasmania Branch)
*Branch Representative Directors
A replacement representative for
Tasmania Branch will be appointed
shortly.
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
David Allardice
[email protected]
SECRETARIAT
Chris Carr
[email protected]
Tel: 1800 629 945
Fax: (03) 9898 0249
MEMBERSHIP
Colin Paulson
[email protected]
EDITOR
Joy Claridge
[email protected]
CORPORATE MEMBER DIRECTORY
Finlaysons provides expert legal
advice to the energy industry.
Australian Geothermal Solutions
provides application design and
product supply of geothermal
ground-sourced heat pumps for
commercial applications, including
swimming pools, schools and
office buildings.
Energeia is a professional
services firm of highly
credentialed energy
specialists dedicated to
achieving excellence for our
clients in their pursuit of
the exceptional.
We also offer assessment and
design of deepwell extraction and
re-injection heating and potential
cooling options for larger
commercial applications.
We offer advisory services
and proprietary industry
and market research
products covering
retailing, demand
management, electric
vehicles, microgeneration,
renewables, energy storage
and smart grid.
www.geothermalsolutions.com.au
www.energeia.net.au
Support the
companies
that support
the AIE
Send
enquiries
about
listing here
to editor@
aie.org.au
We are recognised market leaders
as legal advisers for electricity
and gas projects and in the field
of low-emission technologies.
We advise on the establishment
of wind farm projects and start-up
projects in the solar, geothermal
and water-motion technologies.
As an experienced leader
in Australian commercial law,
we service businesses in local,
national and international markets
from our South Australian base.
www.finlaysons.com.au
Landfill Gas and Power Pty Ltd
Pioneered landfill gas power
generation in Western Australia in
1993. It has since developed LGP
Clean Technology.com
— a unique method
of landfill gas extraction and gas
pre-treatment and processing that
delivers higher efficiencies.
LGP construct and install gas
extraction well-fields, gas
pre-treatment plants, gas flaring
equipment, power station modules
and grid connections; as well as
offering consultancy services in all
aspects of landfill gas management.
www.landfillgas.com.au
Calendar
Forthcoming AIE Events
18–19 November 2013 in Brisbane
10th Australian Coal Science Conference
Solutions for Industry
http://www.coalscience2013.com
If your branch has organised an event in 2014, send details to [email protected] to promote the event in the
EnergyNews.
Other Events 2013-2014: Australasia
21–22 October in SydneyEast Coast Gas Outlook Conference
http://www.informa.com.au
22–25 October in SydneyEastern Australia’s Energy Market Outlook
http://www.questevents.com.au
30–31 October in BrisbaneAustralian Gas Turbines Conference
http://www.informa.com.au/gasturbines
12 November in BrisbaneCoal Seam Gas Water Management
http://www.iired.com.au
13–15 November in BrisbaneAustralian mining and energy conference
http://www.cpaaustralia.com.au
14–15 November in BrisbaneAustralian Geothermal Energy Conference
http://www.ausgeothermal.com
18–19 November in Brisbane
10th Australian Coal Science Conference
http://coalscience2013.com
25–27 November in Brisbane
Oil & Gas Procurement Leaders Forum
http://www.questevents.com.au
27–29 November in MelbourneCreative Innovation 2013
http://www.creativeinnovationglobal.com.au
3–4 December in MelbourneEnergy Efficiency Council National Conference
http://www.eec.org.au/events
3–5 December in BrisbaneAHUG 2013
https://www.etouches.com/ahug2013
4–5 January in Melbourne
4th International Conference on Future Environment & Energy
http://www.icfee.org
5–8 February in
BrisbaneAsia-Pacific Conference on Electrochemical Energy Storage & Conversion
http://mesostructured.org
19–21 February in PerthAustralasian Oil and Gas Exhibition & Conference
http://www.aogexpo.com.au
25–28 February in SydneyAustralian Domestic Gas Outlook
http://www.questevents.com.au
6–9 April in PerthAPPEA 2014
http://www.appeaconference.com.au
25–29 May in Sunshine CoastAPI PowerChem Conference, Exhibition & Training
http://www.tmm.com.au
Please note that the events listed here are based on information provided by event organisers. The AIE does not
necessarily endorse the views of the speakers. The events are brought to the attention of members as potentially
contributing to discussion on relevant energy issues. If you know of any conferences or other major events in our
region that would be of interest to AIE members and will be held in 2014, please email date, location, title and web link
to [email protected]
Other Events: International
For global energy events, see the following websites:
http://www.conferencealerts.com/energy.htm
http://www.ieee.org
http://www.energyiq.co.uk/Energy.aspxhttp://www.pmaconference.com
http://www.eia.doe.gov/calendar/meetings.htmhttp://www.bvents.com
http://www.econference.com.au
http://www.expopromoter.com
http://www.conferensum.com
http://www.wavec.org
http://www.terrapinn.com