veryone needs energy from fossil fuels in one

form or another. They are what keeps us

mobile through combustion engines and
through electricity generation, power the gadgets and
appliances that have improved our quality of life
greatly from something as simple as a light bulb to a
supercomputer.
By far the greatest
primary source of
energy used in the
world is fossil fuel
(coal, oil and natural
gas). Oil remains the
world leading energy
source accounting
for 33% of global
energy consumption
in 2012 followed by
coal at 30% and natural gas at 24%. The rest is split up
between hydro, nuclear and other renewables (e.g.
biofuel) as shown in Figure 1
[1]
. The bulk of the primary
sources of energy are predominantly used in electricity
generation. This means in the pursuit to solve any issues
with primary energy use and sustainability it is essential
to scrutinize electricity generation. 67.4% of electricity
generation was done using fossil fuels in 2010, mainly
coal and gas
[2]
. Irrespective of the economic benefits of
fossil fuels, the environmental impact, especially that
coming from carbon dioxide emissions, is impossible to
overlook.
The issues
Fossil fuels are carbon based fuel sources which release
predominantly carbon dioxide when they go through
combustion. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which
means it absorbs and emits radiation within the thermal
infrared range in the atmosphere
[4]
. This process is what
keeps earth at a relatively cool temperature. Carbon
dioxide makes up almost 80% of anthropogenic
(manmade) greenhouse gas emissions
[7]
. Over the last
century the amount of CO
2
in the atmosphere has risen,
largely driven by fossil fuel use but also because of land
use change and deforestation. Atmospheric

concentrations of CO
2
have increased by 35% since the
industrial revolution
[4]
. It has been confirmed by various
well respected research groups and the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change that global warming is
occurring due to human an activity
[21]
. Evidence of
global warming can also be seen in the extreme weather
events which have been occurring all over the world in
the past decade
[8]
. The other issue with fossil fuels is
their non-renewable nature. From current estimates oil,
coal and gas will run out in approximately 52.9, 109 and
55.7 years respectively if energy consumption follows
the current trend
[1]
.
Even with these issues, a sustainable energy future will
require using all the resources available to us over the
short, medium and long term. At the same time, it means
producing and utilising all these energy sources in a way
that minimises adverse impacts on the environment and
maximises economic and social benefit. To make this
possible new oil, coal and gas extraction techniques are
being developed alongside a rapidly developing
renewable energy industry. Various technologies are also
being developed to tackle the release of the other by-
products of fossil fuel combustion which are also
pollutants. By-products such as oxides of sulphur (SOx)
and nitrogen (NOx) and particulate and trace elements,
such as mercury
[14]
. The technologies mainly discussed,
will be the ones which tackle the issues of fossil fuels
because they still have a high energy density and they
will still play a big part in future electricity generation.
Coal
Coal has long dominated as the main fuel for electricity.
It has been the fastest growing energy source in the last
decade and this is largely driven by the growth of
developing economies, mainly China
[1]
. In 2012 China
alone accounted for 50.2% of global coal consumption. It
is so popular because Coal is the most prevalent and
E
NEW AND EMERGING ENERGY SUPPLY
TECHNOLOGIES FOR A GREENER FUTURE.
Figure 1: Global energy consumption
2012
[1]
widely distributed fossil fuel, accounting for 64% of
globally economically recoverable fossil resources
compared to 19% oil and 17% natural gas
[14]
. Coal is
recoverable across every continent and every region
which provides
energy security
across broad
political arenas
[9]
.
Coals abundance
and distribution,
coupled with its
relatively low and
stable price pattern
makes it a reliable
supply of energy.
This makes it a very
attractive base load
fuel. This means
electricity generated from coal is one of the first sources
to be dispatched throughout the electric grid. Super
critical coal fire power plants are one of the most
affordable methods of power generation in China, costing
USD 33/MWh compared to USD 50 for hydro, USD 53
for nuclear and USD 71 for wind
[17]
.
The problems of using coal
Even though the market price of coal is low, the true cost
is reflected in its impact on the environment and humans.
To assess the true cost of coal you have to look at the
supply chain, i.e. the mining of coal, combustion and
waste disposal.
The mining causes widespread deforestation due to the
excavation, soil erosion and pollution. Miners also suffer
from Coal Workers Pneumoconiosis, colloquially
known as black lung disease. Working in a coal mine
overtime will lead to the accumulation of dust in the
lungs which will cause many health problems
[15]
. The
combustion of coal releases more of the anthropogenic
CO
2
released into the atmosphere than any other fossil
fuel. These include sulphur and nitrogen oxides and
particulate trace elements such as mercury. These
pollutants when released lead to the formation of
photochemical smog and acid rain
[15]
. The waste from
coal combustion known collectively as Coal
Combustion Wastes (CCW). These are mostly ash which
is toxic and often laced with lead, arsenic and cadmium.
When placed in a landfill, these can seep into the ground
and contaminate ground water
[15]
.
The solution
The answer to solving these issues will come through the
development of efficient technologies which reduce the
waste produced at each stage and neutralise the adverse
environmental impact. Legislation has led to the
development of technologies which remove the
particulates from coal combustion and this has proven
effective
[12]
. A considerable amount of the waste from
coal power plants is also recycled. Fly ash and bottom
ash are used in concrete and blended cement and boiler
slag is used in grit/roofing granules
[22]
.
More efficient coal use
By making electricity generation more efficient the
amount of coal per megawatt will be reduced which in
turn would reduce the effect of coal on the environment.
Current pulverised coal fired plants (PCF) are mostly
sub-critical power plants
[17]
. Significant efficiency
improvements and reduction in CO
2
can be achieved if
these are replaced by higher efficiency supercritical (SC)
and ultra-supercritical plants (USC) which operate at
higher pressure and temperatures. Another alternative
would be Integrated Gasification Combined cycle plants
(IGCC) which also offer improved efficiency. IGCC
plants use a gasifier to convert coal to syngas, which
drives a combined cycle turbine. The average PCF plant
efficiency is currently 33% compared to 45% for the
more efficient SC, USC and IGCC plants
[9]
. Highly
efficient modern power plants also emit up to 40% less
CO
2
than the previous coal plants
[9]
. As a result
improving the efficiency of the oldest and most
inefficient plants would reduce CO
2
emissions from coal
use by 27% representing nearly a 7% reduction in global
CO
2
emissions
[9]
. With greater efficiency, comes greater
running cost but the benefits to the environment
outweigh this.




Figure 2: Energy prices
[1]

Carbon capture and storage

Figure 3: Carbon capture and storage
[16]

These plants are also easier to fit with carbon capture and
storage technology (CCS) which can reduce CO
2
emissions to the atmosphere by 80-90%. This involves
capturing CO
2
that would otherwise be released to the
atmosphere and injecting it to be stored in deep
geographical formations. There are several ways to carry
out carbon capture
[16]
.
Capture
Post combustion directly separating CO
2
from
regular flue gas after the combustion process.
The flue gas is cooled and treated to remove
particulate matter. Once cooled, the gas enters an
absorber which consists of a liquid solvent
(usually chilled ammonia) which absorbs the
CO
2
. The CO
2
-
rich solution is then sent to a
stripper where it is separated into two gases: the
pure amine gas, which is recycled into the
stripper and a CO
2
stream which is then
dehydrated, compressed and sent to storage
[16]
.
Pre- combustion carbon and hydrogen are
separated prior to combustion. In this process, air
is purified to extract pure oxygen (O
2
). The O
2
is
then sent to the gasifier where it reacts with the
fuel source (coal/natural gas) to create a
synthesis gas, or syngas. The syngas is purified
which leaves a mixture of hydrogen (H
2
) and
carbon monoxide (CO). Steam is then added to a
shift reactor which converts the CO to CO
2
and
H
2
. The H
2
gas stream can be burned cleanly to
produce steam to run the turbines for electricity
generation. The pure CO
2
stream is then
dehydrated, compressed and sent to storage
[16]
.
Oxyfuel Combustion also involves purifying
the air to extract pure O
2
. The coal is then
combusted with pure O
2
which is used to create
steam to run the turbines for electricity
generation. The flue gas produced will have a
very high concentration of CO
2
due to the
absence of nitrogen (N
2
). This can then be
captured as in post combustion capture, then
stored
[16]
.
Post combustion and oxyfuel capture can be retrofitted to
existing power stations and new power plants constructed
over the next 10-20 years
[21]
. Pre combustion on the
other hand requires utilising IGCC cannot be retrofitted
but it makes coal potentially more flexible because the
hydrogen produced can also be used in hydrogen fuel cell
transportation
[21]
.
Storage
After the capture of the CO
2
the storage becomes the next
issue to deal with. The geographical features being
considered for CO
2
storage fall into three categories;
deep saline formations, depleted oil and gas fields and
unmineable coal seams. The Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) special report on carbon capture
and storage found that the risk of leakage was very likely
to be less than 1 % over 100 years
[21]
.

Deep saline
formations
Very large,
porous rock
formations
typically atleast
800m below the
surface and
containing
water that is unusable because of its high mineral content
and/or salt. This saltwater is around 10 times saltier than
ocean water and its trapped by impermeable rock called
cap rock for millions of years. CO
2
injected into the
Figure 4: carbon storage potential
[21]

formation is contained beneath the cap rock and over
time it will dissolve into the saline water. Saline
formations have the largest storage potential but are the
least well explored
[21]
.
Depleted Oil and Gasfields well explored and have
proven ability to store hydrocarbons over a long period
of time. CO
2
is already widely used in Enhanced Oil
Recovery (EOR) from mature oil fields
[18]
. Injecting CO
2
into an existing oil field reduces the oils viscosity making
it flow easier, and also acts as a pressurising agent
pushing more oil out of the rock. In EOR, the CO
2
can
therefore have a positive commercial value
[21]
.
Unmineable coal seams when the CO
2
is injected into
the seam it is adsorbed by the coal in preference to other
gases e.g. methane which are displaced. This is feasible
when used in conjunction with Enhanced Coal Bed
Methane (ECBM) because the methane released can be
captured and used as a very clean fuel source
[18]
.
CCS has great potential in creating a sustainable energy
future but it is still a relatively new field which still
requires a lot of research and development. The first
commercial example was setup as recent as 2000 in
Weyburn oil field in Midale, Canada. Figure 5 shows the
different stages each aspect of CCS is on in
developmental terms. Carbon capture can also be used in
any fossil fuel power plant such as a natural gas plant
[21]
.
Natural Gas
Natural gas has been widely discussed as a less carbon-
intensive alternative to coal. It is the second most used
fuel source having a 22.2% share in electricity generation
[1]
. Coal production in 2012 increased by only 2.5%
(lower than the usual trend) which is mostly due to a
large increase of natural gas consumption of 4.1% in the
US
[11]
. Combustion of natural gas releases around 50%
less CO
2
than coal per unit of electricity output and
significantly less SO
2
which means before the wider
implementation of CCS, natural gas is a better option for
electricity generation
[12]
. In 2008, in the US only 21% of
natural gas fired electricity was generated by steam
turbine plants and simple cycle turbine plants which are
relatively inefficient
[11]
. 79% was produced by combined
turbine plants, which use waste heat to run steam turbines
boasting efficiencies on average 49% which is much
higher than coal plants. It is widely considered as a
potential bridge fuel for addressing
climate change and transitioning into a
future powered by low-carbon
renewables
[20]
. An issue could be the
possibility of natural gas running out
but new gas extraction techniques are
being developed to allow access to this
cleaner source of fuel.











Figure 5: Stages of develoment of CCS
[21]

Fracking

Figure 6: hydraulic fracturing
[12]

The main method which has been in news headlines
recently is hydraulic fracturing also known as fracking.
Fracking gives us access to previously uneconomical
shale gas which is just natural gas that is trapped within
shale formations
[12]
. Shales are fine-grained sedimentary
rocks that can be rich sources of natural gas. Shown in
Figure 6, fracking is a technique in which water,
chemicals and sand are pumped into these shales to
unlock the hydrocarbons trapped by opening cracks
(fractures) in the rock and allowing natural gas to flow
from the shale into a well. It is necessary to use fracking
in conjunction with horizontal drilling because shale gas
does not usually flow to the well rapidly and commercial
quantities cannot be produced, fracking makes the rapid
flow possible
[12]
.
Issues with Hydraulic fracturing
However, there are some environmental issues which are
associated with fracking. Firstly, fracturing wells require
large amounts of water and this significant use of water
may lead to water shortages and it may affect aquatic life
[19]
. Second, if not managed properly, hydraulic fracturing
fluid, which contains hazardous chemicals such as lead
or radium, can be released leaks or spills
[19]
. Fracking
also produces large amounts of waste water, which may
contain dissolved chemicals and other contaminants that
would require treatment before disposal
[19]
. Lastly,
fracking causes small earthquakes, but these are almost
always too small to cause concern. However, along with
natural gas, fracking fluids and formation water are
returned to the surface. These waters have to be injected
back into the deep wells which can cause earthquakes
large enough to be felt and may cause damage
[19]
.
Alternatives
If extraction methods are made safer, natural gas
electricity generation could be a method of slowing down
climate change. A more permanent option would be to
eliminate carbon dioxide completely and use renewable
energy such as biofuels, solar, hydro or wind generated
electricity. Although the adoption is on the rise in the
developed world. Many developing countries will opt for
fossil fuels because theyre cheaper to produce
[13]
. Hydro
power has proved he most successful and is well
implemented but it requires that there is an existing large
water bodt. Other problems are that solar and wind farms
require land which could be used for farming purposes.
Solar and wind energy is also not consistent so storage
methods will need to be developed.
Energy storage through hydrogen

Figure 7: Energy storage through hydrogen
One of the storage methods being developed acquires
inspiration from plants
[13]
. This is called the artificial leaf
concept. Instead of using photocells to generate
electricity directly from sunlight, you deploy a chemical
reaction that stores solar energy in the form of hydrogen,
which you can then use in a hydrogen fuel cell to
generate electricity
[13]
. This is still in the developmental
stage and the main issue is in trying to find a
combination of materials that give you a cost effective
reaction which would allow large scale implementation
[13]
. These carbon neutral electricity generation methods
are in no doubt the key to tackling climate change but a
lot of research is necessary to make them a sustainable
affordable energy source
[13]
. It is perhaps the reason to
consider separate primary energy which doesnt produce
greenhouse gases, nuclear energy.
Nuclear
Global nuclear output fell by 6.9% in 2012, the largest
decline on record, mostly due to and 89% decline in
nuclear output in Japan
[1]
. This happened due to a
tsunami which devastated japan and cause a meltdown at
the Fukushima plant. One year after the disaster all 52
nuclear reactors were shut down leaving only 2
[5]
.
Authority to restart these power plants was given to the
local governments but in all case they decided against it.
This was heavily due to public opinion. Problems with
nuclear power include the possibility of these accidents,
radioactive waste disposal and the possibility of terrorist
attack, which would occur due to terrorists stealing the
enriched nuclear materials. This has led to Germany
deciding to close all its reactors by 2022 and Italy
banning nuclear power completely. Nuclear power is also
relatively expensive and the decommissioning of a plant
can take years
[5]
.
Better safer nuclear

Figure 8: Travelling wave reactor
[23]

All these issues stem from the materials used as a fuel
source. Todays light water reactors use thermal energy
produced from the fission uranium (U-235)
[23]
. The
Enrichment of U-235 releases U-238 as a by-product and
this is currently set aside as waste. A company called
TerraPower are currently in the development stages of a
travelling wave reactor (TWR) which uses this U-238 as
its fuel source. For conventional nuclear energy plants,
U-235 is used because U-238 is considered too weak of
an energy source
[23]
. A new method can be used to
extract the latent energy from U-238, making it a perfect
source of energy for the TWR. The poorly splitting
isotope of uranium (U-238) can be converted to easily
splitting plutonium given the investment of a single
neutron
[23]
. When a second neutron comes around, the
newly transformed plutonium will readily split and
produce energy. While this concept is used by breeder
reactors via recycling, TWRs do not require the
plutonium to be removed from the reactor and
refabricated into new fuel. The power effectively moves
from the part of the core thats active to the part of the
core that has just produced enough fuel to sustain a chain
reaction. A travelling wave reactor can run for 40+ years
without refuelling, produces 7 times less waste and rely
on natural physics for safe shut down without human
involvement. This will also reduce the waste from the
nuclear legacy of the word
[23]
.
The travelling wave reactor is not the only nuclear
technology being considered for providing energy in the
future. There are other types of fast breeder reactors
being considered such as the thorium fuel reactors and
high temperature reactors such as molten salt reactors
(MSRs) and others. Each of the alternatives offers a
different set of advantages, including improved safety,
reduced waste, less risk of weapons proliferation, and
improved operating efficiencies. Nuclear fusion could
even be on the cards in the future. The National Ignition
Facility (NIF) in California USA in 2013 was the first
facility to achieve an important milestone in the
commercialisation of fusion by producing more energy
than the energy applied. With more research and
development into nuclear technology it could be a
sustainable energy source for the future
[4]
.
Conclusion
In the short term oil and natural gas will be the main
primary sources for electricity generation. This means
research and development into the technologies discussed
will be essential to tackling climate change. Medium
term and moving towards long term, renewables will be
the solution and if development of nuclear reactors
increases, nuclear energy could be the ultimate source of
energy.
References
1. BP (2013). BP Statistical Review of World
Energy June 2013. London: BP. 1-24.
2. International Energy Agency (2012). Key
World Energy Statistics. Paris:
International Energy Agency . 6-35.
3. Anonymous. (2014). Sustainable
energy. Available:
http://withouthotair.blogspot.co.uk/. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
4. Chris Pash. (2014). The World's Top
Scientists: Take Action Now On Climate
Change. Available:
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/the-
worlds-top-scientists-take-action-now-on-
climate-change-2014-2. Last accessed 7th
Mar 2014.
5. Green Peace. (2011). Nuclear power - the
problems. Available:
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/nuclear/pr
oblems. Last accessed 7th Mar 2014.
6. Shahriar, S Erkan, T. (2009). When will
fossil fuel reserves be diminished?. Energy
Policy . 37 (1), 181-189.
7. Richard Black. (2011). Global warming
'confirmed' by independent
study. Available:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-
environment-15373071. Last accessed 07
Mar 2014.
8. Fiona Harvey. (2012). Scientists attribute
extreme weather to man-made climate
change. Available: ccsmanmade-climate-
change. Last accessed 07 Mar 2014.
9. World Coal association . (2013). COAL
MEETING THE CLIMATE CHALLENGE.
Available: http://www.worldcoal.org/coal-
the-environment/coal-use-the-
environment/improving-efficiencies/. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
10. International Energy Agency.
(2010). Coal. Available:
http://www.iea.org/topics/coal/. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
11. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
(2012). What is shale gas and why is it
important?. Available:
http://www.eia.gov/energy_in_brief/article
/about_shale_gas.cfm. Last accessed 7th
Mar 2014.
12. Fullon M, (2011). Comparing life-cycle
greenhouse gas emissions from natural
gas and coal. Frankfurt: World Watch
Institute. 3-24.
13. Energy Saving Trust. (2007). Getting
started with renewables.Available:
http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/Gen
erating-energy/Getting-started-with-
renewables. Last accessed 7th Mar 2014.
14. World Coal Association (2007). COAL
MEETING THE CLIMATE CHALLENGE.
Richmond: World Coal Institute. 1-36.
15. Short, R (2008). The True Cost of Coal.
Amsterdam: Greenpeace International. 8-
32.
16. ICO2N. (2008). What is carbon capture
and storage - An overview.Available:
http://www.ico2n.com/what-is-carbon-
capture. Last accessed 7th Mar 2014.
17. Anthony, J. (2006). Modelling New Coal
Projects: Supercritical or
Subcritical?. Available: Modelling New Coal
Projects: Supercritical or Subcritical?. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
18. Stephen, F (2010). Storing and Using CO2
for Enhanced Coalbed Methane Recovery
in Unmineable Coal Beds of the Northern
Appalachian Basin and Parts of the Central
Appalachian Basin. 2nd ed. Kentucky :
MRCSP. 15-21.
19. Food and water watch . (2012). Fracking,
Climate Change and the Water
Crisis. Available:
http://documents.foodandwaterwatch.org/
doc/FrackingClimateWaterBrief.pdf. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
20. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
(2014). Natural gas . Available:
http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/issuesandt
rends/production/2013/?src=Natural-f4.
Last accessed 7th Mar 2014.
21. Bert, M (2005). IPCC Special Report on
Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage. New
York: Cambridge University Press. 75-100
22. American coal ash association.
(2007). uses of coal ash. Available:
http://www.coalashfacts.org/. Last
accessed 7th Mar 2014.
23. Terrapower.(2013). Travellingwave reactor
design. Available:
http://terrapower.com/pages/traveling-
wave-reactor. Last accessed 7th Mar 2014.