CUC still planning to burn natural gas
(CNS): CUC has announced that it is looking for qualification submissions from prospective natural gas suppliers as part of its effort to reduce the cost of energy production and carbon emissions. But the decision comes in the wake of the government’s revised National Energy Policy (NEP), which now calls for a 100% transition to green energy by 2050.
In a press release about the invitation to suppliers, CUC said that its own Integrated Resource Plan and the NEP call for an increase in the use of clean energy and a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions over the long term.
As a result, last year, it began an infrastructure project to upgrade and convert 68 megawatts of its diesel generation to use natural gas as a fuel.
In response to CNS questions, CUC said that the upgrade to the engines, which is in progress, is expected to be complete by 2025, and the necessary infrastructure to receive the gas should be complete by 2027, when the gas supply should be available.
“Natural gas is cleaner burning fuel than diesel and produces 30% less carbon emissions,” CUC stated, adding that the project will decrease costs to customers through the improvement in fuel efficiency by the engine upgrades.
“Natural gas is lower in cost than diesel or propane, with less CO2 emissions, and these lower costs and emissions will positively impact CUC’s customers. With the significantly lower cost of natural gas, CUC’s analysis indicates that the infrastructure investment needed for its importation of liquid natural gas and the conversion of CUC’s existing generation is justified,” CUC said.
However, natural gas is a fossil fuel that contributes significantly to global warming, not just from the emissions when it is burned to make electricity but during the process of extracting it. While it releases less CO2, the leakage of methane, the primary component of natural gas, is a major problem in the distribution as well as the extraction. Methane is 34 times stronger than CO2 at trapping heat over a 100-year period and 86 times stronger over 20 years.
CUC argued that while natural gas is a fossil fuel, it leaves a significantly smaller footprint than continuing to burn diesel.
Natural gas is also expensive, and there are a number of supply chain challenges, not least because of the war in Ukraine, which has impacted the global market. While the market remains volatile, it could be many years before the price is as low as it once was. Nevertheless, CUC said that natural gas is still significantly lower when compared to diesel.
“The price for natural gas, especially in its liquid form, is not as volatile as diesel,” officials added.
With the revised NEP calling for a complete end to fossil fuel use here by 2050, CUC’s decision seems at odds with the country’s long-term energy policy aims. However, the power supplier said the project supports the National Energy Policy by embracing energy efficiency, reducing emissions, and diversifying the generation portfolio with the capability to generate energy from natural gas or diesel.
“The approved 2017-2037 National Energy Policy supports the consideration of natural gas as a resource for power generation,” CUC said.
CNS has submitted a number of questions to the Ministry of Sustainability, which has acknowledged the submissions, and we are now awaiting a response.
In its press release, CUC said the acquisition of a supply of natural gas will increase the energy diversity on Grand Cayman. “As the Company and Grand Cayman continue to grow and expand, we are delighted to launch this process in support of the transition to cleaner energy solutions,” CUC stated.
Qualified suppliers interested in developing a natural gas supply solution for CUC are invited to submit written notification of interest no later than 15 September.
See full details here.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Business, Energy, Science & Nature, utilities
Will this ever happen? I remember CUC installing new diesel generators back in 2007 or 2008 and one of the manufacturer’s selling points on them was a multi-fuel capability but CUC backed by the minister responsible at the time insisted they were sticking to diesel.
Why LNG when we have two propane company’s on the island Propane has a higher btu factor per gallon is safer to store and transport and burns cleaner. With one next to cuc the other by the Jackson Point terminal if they worked together we the people would start seeing savings and create more local jobs for locals.
Propane does not combust as cleanly as natural gas, actually. The organic molecule for propane (C3H8) is more complex than that for methane (CH4). Where combined with oxygen (O2) in combustion, you are more likely to end up with partial combustion products for a propane fuel mix than natural gas.
Propane burns cleaner – While both fuels are considered to be “clean,” natural gas is a fossil fuel that releases methane when burned; propane combustion produces almost no greenhouse gas.
LOL, maybe don’t quote a propane website for your response.
It would be good if any new natgas infrastructure and equipment could be hydrogen compatible, given long-term payback of the upfront investment and hydrogen’s potential as a cleaner source of intermittent energy.
We should be more efficient about how to burn the planet and sell the ash. Good plan.
I have absolutely no faith in CUC to do the right thing. If they announce that they are no longer selling shares and will be buying shares back at Market rate and getting rid of the twisted shareholders, then I would finally see some light at the end of the tunnel. Until it’s no longer filling the pockets of politicians, I really fail to see how they will ever be for the people.
$uckity $uck LNG is a DANGEROUS Fossil Fuel ⛽️ and we need zero emissions – PROTEST NO or we are all toast!
READ & CRY FOR HUMANITY 👇🏼
“METHANE ERUPTIONS THREATEN”
On September 8, 2023, the North Atlantic sea surface reached a new record high temperature, of 25.4°C, even higher than the record reached the day before.
The situation is critical! More heat entering the Arctic Ocean threatens to destabilize hydrates and cause huge amounts of methane to erupt and enter the atmosphere.
The NASA image shows the poor state of the sea ice.
On September 8, 2023, the Polarstern reached the North Pole. The University of Bremen image shows Arctic sea ice concentration and the route followed by the Polarstern.
The threat is that, as the water of the Arctic Ocean keeps heating up, heat will reach the seafloor and destabilize methane hydrates contained in sediments at the seafloor, resulting in eruptions of huge amounts of methane.
Erupting from the hydrates occurs at great force, since the methane expands 160 when decompressed, resulting in the methane rapidly rising in the form of plumes, leaving little or no opportunity for microbes to decompose the methane in the water column. Furthermore, the atmosphere over the Arctic contains very little hydroxyl, resulting in methane persisting in the air over the Arctic much longer than elsewhere.
Ominously, very high methane levels continue to be recorded at Barrow, Alaska, U.S.
From the post ‘Methane eruptions threaten’, at:
https://arctic-news.blogspot.com/2023/09/methane-eruptions-threaten.html
Uhhmmm, that sounds like a good idea I think…we won’t be free of CUC until 2070 likely…may as well do the best we can now.
They say it’s cheaper, you say it’s expensive. Which is it? There are numerous LNG terminals in the US Gulf and tankers pass by here all the time. The price in Europe is not very relevant.
Yup pipe it in from Guyana and Trinidad
How does CUC plan to import LNG? International regulatory requirements are applicable to all LNG shipping traffic and LNG marine terminal operations. The terminal and LNG ship have to comply with IMO International Ship and Port Facility regulations.
You simply cannot ‘roll on and roll off’ LNG tanks on Marine Cargo vessels visiting from US ports without complying with regulations.
Port Authority an OfReg ..need to wake up. CIG needs to approve infrastructure. Simply because a National Energy Policy Document mentions LNG does not mean that LNG imports on a commercial scale are permitted.
The transition to renewable energy here in cayman is totally achievable. 2050 is a decent target but it’s worth understanding the cost of creating all the kit and batteries, as well as the disposal of same.
If the do-not-exceed 1.5’F “point of no return” is going to be surpassed within 3 years, how are 2070, 2050, or 2030 dates still rolling off tongues as acceptable can-kicking target dates for action?!? Extinction by math fail.
I know the government’s plan sounds great but it will never happen. We will be stuck with CUC until 2070 at least (not for all our power but at least half).
You may as well make it more efficient and burn less fossil fuels for the next few decades. Sadly though, none of the savings will be passed on to us as they will add a surcharge for all the improvements they did until those are paid off.
Buy CUC shares, lol.
Before the smart-asses comment “so why they na going full solar right now then” or “break up the monopoly”, consider the following:
Initial Investment Cost: The upfront cost of establishing a comprehensive solar infrastructure, including panels, batteries, and grid upgrades, can be substantial. Smaller utilities might find it financially challenging to make this initial investment.
Intermittency: Solar power generation is dependent on weather conditions and time of day, leading to intermittency issues. Combustion engines can provide consistent energy output, ensuring a reliable power supply for residents.
Energy Storage Challenges: Storing excess solar energy for nighttime or cloudy days can be expensive and technologically complex. Until cost-effective and efficient energy storage solutions are more widely available, relying on imported fuel for stability might be a pragmatic choice.
Transition Timeline: The utility’s plan to transition to solar in a few decades indicates a commitment to sustainability. They may be strategically waiting for advancements in solar technology and cost reductions before making the full switch.
“Strategically waiting…”. Like the introduction of a proper public transportation system. Or waste to energy plant. You have come up with anew catchphrase for dithering and doing nothing. COG will love you. A lot of your comments are fair criticisms but years out of date already. Battery storage systems and cost of infrastructure have changed significantly in the last 5 years. But CUC has decided to invest in switching from one fossil fuel to another lol.
Incinerating household and industrial waste will never be cleaner than LP or Nat gas. Cayman has no emissions agency or regulations on the smoke stacks and scrubbers that would be necessary within 10 miles of the incinerator, nor any handling instructions for the concentrated slag that would result.
Well, CIG’s energy policy does in fact mirror what _||) said above in regards to transitioning slowly to mitigate increased costs on the consumer while maintaining stability:
Quoting CNS, “The NEP also states in this section that to “manage the cost of the transition to 100% renewable energy for generation, the government will evaluate the best economic options for achieving this objective over the policy horizon and, where it is determined to be prudent and achieves the objective of balancing environmental and consumers’ interests, consider the use of transitional fuels such as liquefied natural gas (LNG) or compressed natural gas (CNG) for power generation if doing so does not obligate consumers to pay for new fossil fuel infrastructure in the long term and at the expense of renewable energy investments”.”
Excellent points, well made.
Yeah dream on, like the non existent infrastructure including deep water discharge point, bulk storage terminal and pipeline to CUC is a lesser capital outlay?
Your opinion suggests you are a potential bidder and or shareholder.
I would counter your whole comment by pointing out that Cayman Brac Power and Light (now owned by Dart) are proposing to move over half their power generation to solar as soon as OfReg approves it. If they can do it, I’m pretty sure CUC could do it.
“as soon as OfReg approves it” is the key point. They’ve been sitting on moving any solar projects forward for more than a year (and that’s not even counting the lack of progress from their office to formalize any procurement since 2017). There is not a lack of will in Grand Cayman for more renewable energy.
Do some research. Batteries are not necessary, you keep the diesel/gas generators on standby for clouds and transition to them in the evening. A far better solution than batteries is compressed air energy storage (CAES) – think big inner tubes underwater. Google FLASC. Inform yourself.
This was addressed by “Combustion engines can provide consistent energy output, ensuring a reliable power supply for residents.” – CUCs goal isn’t 100% right now because of this same reason. You’re actually in agreement that the transition will be slow and still require stand by energy from fossil fuels for some time.
The first few words of OP’s comment was “Before the smart-asses comment ‘so why they na going full solar right now then’ “
FLASC is still in the development phase with no commercial operation. Long duration storage is going to be a key challenge to renewables targets, but there isn’t really any technology at a stage to support getting to 100% (yet) without unsupportable costs. The hope behind the NEP is that a variety of LDES technologies will mature to market by the time they’re needed, but nothing is even close right now.
Nonsense- all have been debunked time and again with valid solutions.
You simply have wool in your ears.
Yes instead of figuring out solutions let’s just give up. also this is a bunch of BS you wrote.
Will these cost benefits be felt by consumers, or only by CuC shareholders?
Rates will definitely climb to pay for the infrastructure and we’ll still be subject to a volatile fuel surcharge. And this is a guaranteed licence to raise the base rate even higher.
Just a reminder that anyone can buy CUC shares and absolutely should.
And add to the problem.
All good stuff CUC
Is this really going to reduce our electricity bills in our lifetimes..?
Or is the cost of converting to a less expensive fuel, going to absorb all the “savings “..?
Also, any forecast of likely impact on the share price..?
absorb the savings.
how about special gas supplement like they did after Ivan.
We’ll have a surcharge to cover it…watch
Rest assured, there will never be any meaningful energy transition or greentech consumer savings in the Cayman Elite-CIG-CUC loaded deck.
Cheap and clean. Excellent decision CUC.
Clean lol. Where do you think this gas comes from and how does it get there?
which bit is clean?
Wake up, it’s not going to be cheap – open your wallet
cheap and clean is solar which we have tons of on island.
Free suppy 5th floor GAB and plenty from the Parliment building
There’s already enough natural gas in the Parliament. Why not tap that?
where’s the LOL button 😂