October 8, 2007
Italy says no to LNG
Sometimes you have to wonder whether people have any idea of the effort involved in making it possible for them to turn on the light or the central heating every day. Italy is a country that relies on gas to generate 60 per cent of its electricity, and on imports for 85 per cent gas. It is heavily dependent on Russia and Algeria - two countries whose continued friendliness cannot necessarily be taken for granted - to continue functioning. So one would think that projects to increase the options for importing gas should be a no-brainer. Certainly that is what the European Commission seemed to think, when it backed the Brindisi LNG terminal being built by BG Group in the "heel" of Italy. In January, it identified the terminal as part of its priority interconnection plan, on which "urgent action" was needed.
Yet on October 5 Italy announced that it had suspended the permit for BG to keep working on the project, pending a fresh environmental impact assessment. The environment ministry put a curt statement to that effect (in Italian) on its website on Friday. That appears to mean a delay of at least three months, maybe more. Not that it matters all that much, of course, as the site has been closed since it was taken over by police as part of an inquiry into corruption allegations in February.
BG is far from being the only company to face problems. Even Eni, the national gas champion, has run into local opposition. This being Italy, of course, the government is not united. Pierluigi Bersani, the economy minister, backs the Brinidisi LNG development. But the strength of the opposition suggests
This at a time when Gazprom’s row with Ukraine over a $1.3bn debt has reawakened fears in all EU countries - Italy above all - about the vulnerability of their gas supplies. There are apparently fierce local objections in Brindisi. People are not opposed to LNG per se; they just don’t want it coming into their city. But with government ministires in Rome apparently prepared to support those objectors, the risk that the lights will go out - as Fulvio Conti, chief executive of Enel, has warned (in Italian again) - grows ever greater.
Smart from Italy ! : LNG is very expensive, addictive,highly explosive and toxic and takes away billions of euros in investments from what Italy and Europe really needs:Energy Independence trough Hydrogen fuelcells.org/ and by getting the Hydrogen directly from fuel right next to the fuelcell inside the car/truck and avoiding super-cooled liquid hydrogen tanks,trough turbines for wind and water,trough solar energy with PV and thermal,geothermal,fusion small reactors,ethanol from sugarcane/jatropha/rapeseeds/corn/etc. and biodiesels,and your ideas…
Europe has very little natural coal left, but the Americas has 200 billion (USA) tons ( USA has aprox.100+ billion tons and Latin America also aprox. 100+ billion tons and Asia has another 100+ billion tons aprox.,these are huge volumes and it’s unrealistic and unpractical to try to just write-off coal in these markets,the trick is to find a way to capture carbon dioxide when coal goes to liquid diesel and steam-electricity,if Researchers-Universities-Industry were offered a “100 million euro Reward tax free” to whoever finds a way to capture 95+% of carbon dioxide from coal,we would see discoveries in motion,after all we are just human and respond mostly to money,also capturing carbon dioxide would open new roads into pollution and energy , a crash program into carbon dioxide,etc., capture is very important, until hydrogen delivery and small fusion reactors for cars and trucks is available,Italy and Europe are wise to focus on smart safe choices and avoid the highly addictive,toxic , explosive and expensive LNG patented business proposition,also LNG’s and its routes and port terminals are easy terror targets very expensive to secure, they are a nightmare.
Posted by: blogger | October 9th, 2007 at 6:52 pm | Report this commentYou say: “LNG is very expensive, addictive,highly explosive and toxic and takes away billions of euros in investments from what Italy and Europe really needs:Energy Independence trough Hydrogen fuelcells…”
I say: “Very expensive” Yes it is fairly expensive, but the costs relative to pipeline gas have been falling, and expensive gas is better than no gas at all.
“Addictive” Yes, but again no more so than any other gas supply.
“Highly explosive” This is just not true. Getting LNG to blow up would be very difficult. No-one has managed it yet. LPG is much more of a risk, and no-one seems to worry about that.
“Toxic” Well, you wouldn’t want to drink it, I admit. Not sure why it would pollute more than any other variety of natural gas, though.
“Europe really needs… Hydrogen fuel cells” Yes, I think you are right, but Europe is not going to get them in a generally workable form early in the next decade, which is why Italy will need that gas.
Carbon capture from coal-fired power plants is also an excellent idea, I agree on that, too. But again, we don’t have that technology and we won’t for five years-plus. So how does Italy keep the lights on before then?
Posted by: Ed Crooks | October 10th, 2007 at 1:56 am | Report this commentThe alternative is “alternative” power…let’s think about it…
Pierluigi Rotundo
Posted by: Pierluigi Rotundo | October 15th, 2007 at 3:27 pm | Report this commentbut if we never invest in research (or invest too little), alternative power (of fuel cells) will never come…
Pierluigi Rotundo
Posted by: Pierluigi Rotundo | October 15th, 2007 at 3:28 pm | Report this commentI think Hydrogen fuel cells are a great idea. But like most I’m also loathe to place all of my hopes on the idea that we can commercialise the technology in the time needed to provide a solution to Italian(and Europe in generals)concerns regarding energy security.
Allied to this I think coal is suitable as a stopgap (albeit limited) for those countries who are fortunate enough to possess it, but don’t see how it can help Europe and am not sure that governments should be stepping in to fund R&D projects in the absence of private sector belief in its commerciality(its a dangerous and expensive road as we’ve seen with renewables and nuclear). We should be grateful that LNG is located in places which generally do not have the domestic demand to justify monetising gas reserves. The new generation of LNG projects(OMAN etc) are seeing significant reduction in costs and will invariably form part of the long term fuel mix.
Posted by: Kwaku Boakye-adjei | October 22nd, 2007 at 4:19 pm | Report this comment