Greenpeace Demonstrates Limited Understanding - The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition

17 April 2009 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Greenpeace reveals its lack of understanding of electricity generation
The attack by Greenpeace's climate change campaigner Simon Boxer on Contact Energy's proposals for new hydropower schemes shows that he - and Greenpeace - have little understanding of electricity generation in New Zealand, according to Bryan Leyland, an energy consultant who chairs the economic panel of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.

Mr Leyland says Mr Boxer’s claims that "New Zealand's increasing use of energy from fossil fuels is largely due to the country's over-reliance on hydro electricity" is nonsense.

“Up until the late 1970s, the New Zealand power system was primarily hydro and geothermal with the fossil fuel New Plymouth, Meremere and Marsden power station providing backup for the hydropower stations in a dry year. This gave us maximum benefit from our hydropower stations. Since then the load has increased and most of this new load has been supplied by three new gas-fired combined cycle stations and two units at Huntly Power Station all operating at an average output of about 80%. The other two units at Huntly operate mainly to provide backup for a dry year.

“If the proposed new Clutha River stations could be built overnight, all the units at Huntly power station would be available for dry year backup and the combined cycle stations would operate at a lower average output. So, contrary to Mr Boxer's claims, there is no doubt that we would use less fossil fuel and carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced.

“Mr Boxer's claim that by building wind or wave power schemes instead of hydropower, we would have a broader base to switch to when the hydro lakes are low is also nonsense. I have analysed the output of New Zealand's windpower schemes from 2000 through 2008. There is a clear seasonal effect with maximum output during the spring time when it rains, the snow melts and the wind blows and the least output during autumn and early winter when rainfall is low, snow is accumulating and the wind is at its annual minimum. During last year's electricity shortage, windpower was 25% below average during the months from February to May. So windpower makes the hydro storage situation worse, not better. Wave power is far from being technically and economically viable, so it is not worth considering. And windpower is very much more expensive per kilowatt hour than hydro,” continued Mr Leyland

“Hence, contrary to what Mr Boxer says, if we switched from hydropower to windpower, backup from fossil fuel power stations would still be needed. But backing up windpower is much more difficult and expensive because the output of windfarms changes rapidly as the wind increases and decreases. To keep the lights on, the backup power stations need to be able to change output from nothing to full power and back again several times a day. Modern, efficient fossil fuel stations cannot do this. Inefficient and expensive open cycle gas turbines are the only practical option.

“Mr Boxer should restrict himself to subjects on which he has some expertise and Greenpeace should stop allowing its staff to make statements that are in direct conflict with the evidence from the real world,” Mr Leyland concluded.
ends

© Scoop Media