Clik on the headline (link) for the full text.

Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage

Trade-off looms for arid US regions: water or power?
Peter N. Spotts, Christian Science Monitor
Water consumed by electric utilities could account for up to 60 percent of all nonfarm water used in the US by 2030.
----
The drive to build more power plants for a growing nation – as well as the push to use biofuels – is running smack into the limits of a fundamental resource: water.

Already, a power plant uses three times as much water to provide electricity to the average household than the household itself uses through showers, toilets, and the tap. The total water consumed by electric utilities accounts for 20 percent of all the nonfarm water consumed in the United States. By 2030, utilities could account for up to 60 percent of the nonfarm water, because they use water for cooling and to scrub pollutants.

This water-versus-energy challenge is likely to be most acute in fast-growing regions of the US, such as the Southeast and the arid Southwest. Assuming current climate conditions, continued growth in these regions could eventually require tighter restrictions on water use, on electricity use, or both during the hottest months, when demand for both skyrockets, researchers say. Factor in climate change and the projections look worse. This is prompting utilities to find ways to alleviate the squeeze.
(17 Apr 2007)

EU should not discard military to secure oil, expert says
Euractiv
The EU should stand ready to help the US protect strategic oil-supply routes and facilities in the Middle East against possible terrorist attacks, said an expert from a leading US think-tank.

Simon Henderson, director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that Europe should assess all options, including military, when looking at its oil-supply security in the 21st century.

Speaking at a lunch debate organised by the Transatlantic Institute on 17 April in Brussels, Henderson said that the EU and the US needed to work closer to fend off "possible terrorist attacks on refineries and terminals" and ensure that "supplies continue to be delivered at the price and quantity that is needed".
(18 Apr 2007)

European energy security
A bear at the throat
The Economist
RUSSIA'S president, Vladimir Putin, must be feeling smug. His strategy of using the country's vast natural resources to restore the greatness lost after the break-up of the Soviet Union seems to be paying off. If power is measured by the fear instilled in others—as many Russians believe—he is certainly winning.

The Soviet Union relied on its military machine for geopolitical power: its oil and gas were just a way to pay for it. In today's Russia, energy is itself the tool of influence. To use it the Kremlin needs three things: control over Russian energy reserves and production, control over the pipelines snaking across its territory and that of its neighbours, and long-term contracts with European customers that are hard to break. All three are in place. For all the talk of a common strategy towards Russia, the EU is divided and stuck for an answer.

Gazprom, Russia's energy giant, cherished by Mr Putin as a “powerful lever of economic and political influence in the world”, has long-term supply contracts with most European countries, including France, Germany, Italy and Austria. It also has direct access to these countries' domestic markets. The EU reckons that half its gas imports now come from Russia. Newer EU members, such as Hungary and the Czech Republic, are almost entirely dependent on Russian gas. Moreover, a pipeline network that it inherited from the Soviet Union gives Russia control over gas imported from Central Asia.

The EU has few ideas for how to deal with its chief energy supplier. “We know we should do something about Russia, but we don't know what,” one Brussels official says.
(12 April 2007)

Climate expert urges dropping clean coal
Tim Dornin, the Australian
A CLIMATE change expert has urged Australia to step away from the development of clean coal technology for power generation in favour of natural gas and nuclear energy.

Jesse Ausubel, director of the Program for the Human Environment at the Rockefeller University in New York, has also bagged renewable fuels like solar and wind power saying while they may be renewable they were not really environmentally friendly.

Mr Ausubel said he believed the push to develop clean coal technology would ultimately fail - because of the high cost involved and the problem of dealing with toxic waste products like sulphur and mercury.

“There is a lot of interest in somehow trying to salvage or protect the coal industry,” he told the Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association (APPEA) conference.

“But truly making clean, zero emission coal is a very hard job. It is a lot easier to begin with natural gas. I won't say it can't be done, but in the end you're still left with these hazardous waste piles.”

Mr Ausubel said a big mistake many environmentalists made was to think that renewable fuels were more friendly to the environment.

On a scale that mattered, he said, renewable fuels like ethanol and wind power required large areas of land which had to be developed at the expense of nature.
(16 April 2007)

Egypt weighs domestic energy needs as export demands grow
Andrew England, Financial Times
..The cement sector has been one of Egypt's success stories, transforming the country from a net importer to the world's eighth largest exporter in 2005.

The growth of energy-intensive industries has helped boost foreign direct investment to record highs. FDI was $7bn (€5.1bn, £3.5bn) in the first six months of the current fiscal year, 20 per cent of which was in energy-intensive sectors, says Rachid Mohamed Rachid, trade minister.

The government in Cairo, however, is discovering that the proliferation of such industries is a mixed blessing. The cement industry's environmental impact is worrying and energy-intensive industries are eating up crucial resources - causing the government to rethink how best to allocate its natural gas reserves.

The growth of these industries has coincided with rising domestic demand for gas, putting a huge burden on the treasury as energy subsidies have swelled from E£1.2bn ($220m, €162.8m, £110.8m) in 1999 to E£42bn, according to figures on a government website.

The government also has to take into account the desire of international energy companies to increase liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Groups such as ENI, BG, and BP have invested billions of dollars in Egypt's gas sector, causing production to double to more than 5bn standard cubic feet per day. Companies have an understanding with the government that they will increase exports as they develop and discover new fields, one expert says. ..
(17 Apr 2007)