At one time our gas was derived from the destructive distillation of coal. The process was devised by William Murdoch, one of those Victorian fellows who invented lots of things in the nineteenth century though he is hardly remembered today.
Bituminous coal was heated in retorts and broken down into gases, tars and coke. The process is still carried out today but whereas in the past, coke was a by product, today the coke is the primary product for the reduction of iron ore in blast furnaces.
The gas was mostly hydrogen with lesser amounts of methane, ethylene and deadly poisonous carbon monoxide. Those of us old enough remember the evil smell, which was hydrogen sulphide (again poisonous).
After being purified the gas was primarily used for lighting in the early days. Contaminants in the gas meant that it burned in fishtail burners with a bright luminous yellow flame. Later, further purification meant that a gas mantle was needed as the luminosity disappeared. (The story of the gas mantle is itself worth following up, some of them being radioactive and others carcinogenic.)
The gasworks also produced a vast range of byproducts used in the manufacture of fertilizer, dyes, explosives, sulphur, ammonia, tar, napthalene, hydrogen cyanide and hydrogen sulphide. Less useful was arsenic and mercury together with some radioactive substances; lead and radium. The gasworks are long gone, leaving behind ground that is so contaminated as to be unusable for any purpose.
Back in 1965, natural gas was discovered in large amounts under the North Sea, mostly methane and of double the energy value. It may be found associated with oil or on it’s own. It often has to be processed to remove carbon dioxide and “condensate gases”.
To make use of this, new pipelines were constructed, and new storage facilities though some of the old coal gas “gasometers” were used. Some of our gas is stored in the national grid pipelines at high pressure. The gas production in our part of the North Sea is now declining, we now import large amounts of our gas from Norway and by cryogenic tankers from the Middle East.
Our main gas storage is in a depleted gas field to the North East of Hull which is “refilled” with gas from elsewhere. Technical problems have recently arisen with this arrangement, involving leakage; the consequences are not yet fully apparent. However the outlook is not good.
The government has recently decreed that from 2025 no new gas boilers will be fitted in new-build houses and from 2035 no new gas boilers will be fitted anywhere, ie the use of gas domestically is to be terminated after over 200 years.
It has to be said that this will end the domestic gas explosions we frequently hear about.
So what is the thinking behind this? It all comes back to efficient use of energy and the new combined cycle gas fired electricity power stations.
In the traditional coal or oil fired power station, coal/oil is used to raise steam which drives steam turbines which drive the generators. Efficiency is around 30% and that only by extremely complex and expensive design.
In a combined cycle power station, gas is used to drive a gas turbine which drives a generator. The hot exhaust gases from the turbine are then used to raise steam which drives a steam turbine which drives yet another generator. This means that two “bites” are had, raising efficiency to around 60% ie, twice as much electricity for the same energy input. There are other savings in fuel storage, handling and maintenance. CO2 emissions are around half that of equivalent coal fired plants. Pollution is very much less than coal fired plants and what there is is more easily dealt with. There is no ash disposal problem. They are more suitable to run in parallel with renewable energy sources.
So how then are our homes to be heated? The answer is by use of electricity. This would be completely unviable except that use is to be made of heat pumps. These multiply the heat energy derived from the electricity by around three. (The Coefficient Of Performance.) A “refrigeration” cycle pumps heat from outside the house to inside. To keep installation costs down, the source of the heat is usually the air, though heat stored in the ground can also be utilised. Heat pumps are being fitted even now, the air source ones have a large box with a fan located outside the building. The building needs to be well insulated, have a high thermal mass and ideally underfloor heating. Some heat pumps are reversible so the house owner can enjoy the benefits of air conditioning too. The technology is yet improving.
The problem with air source heat pumps is that they become less effective as it gets colder. The problem with ground source heat pumps is expense of installation.
The benefit of this energy policy is, as regards home heating, that overall we get six times the bang for our buck as regards energy consumption.
Energy losses transporting electricity are significantly less than for gas. The gas grid will eventually cease to exist, however our existing electricity grid will need significant upgrading, especially if we are also to embrace electric cars.
Further reading:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Murdoch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_gas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_mantle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combined_cycle_power_plant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station#Pollution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_source_heat_pumps
https://www.shutterstock.com/search/heat+pump
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_heat_pump
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance
Photo by STML 
Air source heat pumps are notoriously inefficient but most properties are not able to install a ground source heat pump whether shallow or deep. The whole energy policy is an absolute shambles.
All because CO2 has been demonised to suit a political agenda. Real pollution of course is a different matter but as MK says may be reduced over time by a boycott of Chinese goods.
Harold thank you. A very useful, interesting article. I left power generation at the coal power station stage although in Johannesburg SA we did use jet engines running on jet fuel to meet peak demand which is not dissimilar to gas turbine generation but without using the exhaust heat to drive a steam turbine.
Although fuel cost is important I think security of supply is too so, since we have coal, I think we should continue to generate a significant proportion of our power from coal. I also think we should get fracking.
I’m not sure of the economics of combined cycle gas power generation but I note that China seems to be sticking with coal, much of which they import from Australia so presumably they find it more cost effective.
I also note that there’s no apparent opposition in the UK to importing cheap goods made in China with cheap electricity generated by burning lots of cheap coal and emitting lots of CO2.
(I personally have no problem with the relatively small amount of human-caused CO2 in the atmosphere which helps plants grow more quickly.)
The last deep coal mine in the UK closed years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_the_United_Kingdom
There are a few open cast mines yet remaining but all is in decline.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-pit_coal_mining_in_the_United_Kingdom#Current_sites
Thanks Harold for this most interesting detail ! – I have to admit to not paying too much attention, but wasn’t nuclear power supposed to be the modern thing for making electricity ? – Huge initial cost, but with a lower cost of production !
There is a constant power provision that has as yet not been used. – The ebb and flow of the tides has continued since Adam was a lad, and the use of this natural movement could be turned into electric power, if given the will, (and the money) ! – Wind comes and goes. whereas the rise and fall of tides is a constant. – No nasty bi product either, but it would need to be quite big to be useful !
It is proposed that some hydrogen will be added to the natural gas. Boiler manufacturers are developing central heating boilers that will run on such a mixture, and prototypes are already operating. Manufacturers are also developing “Hydrogen ready” boilers that can be quickly and cheaply switched from natural gas to hydrogen, and they have demonstration prototypes operating now.
I think the impetus behind all this is to do with Government policy for the UK to become carbon neutral.
Can’t see gas boilers being banned for new dwellings by 2025. The alternatives are far too expensive and will push up the cost of housing unnecessarily.
Remember that in 2006, we were told that all new houses from 2016 would be zero-carbon, It could be seen early on that was never going to be achieved and the target was quietly dropped. In the same way, new houses will still be fitted with gas boilers after 2025 when the penny drops that these new measures are just virtue-signalling nonsense.
Dick Strawbridge, former Army Officer before he migrated to a French Chateau built an underground accumulator of large rocks with extensive straw bales insulation. A solar powered fan took hot summer air from the inside apex of the roof and pushed the hot air down a tube that heated the rocks underground. Over time the rocks became very hot and in Wintertime heat from said rocks was released into said house. I think this system is used in New Zealand too. Expensive in an existing property but feasible in a new build. Efficient insulation keeps us warm with very little cost, which would not please the big company shareholders, but good for you and me. Many other ways to gain free heat after initial outlay of dosh just needs some innovative thinking by the powers that be. But am I naive to think that the big energy giants would allow us to innovate? I doubt it. Profits before people as always.
Thermal heat store…Ineffective. There is a shoulder period (about three weeks) when no energy is available to put in the store and no energy is needed for the house. During this period, the stored heat all leaks away. So, when needed it’s all escaped.
So ice houses never existed to providee ice during a Summer?
Ice houses were buried underground.
Many tons of ice were stored to produce a few ounces of ice in Summer
In case people don’t think it would work. Let me assure it works. It does. In the 70’s in a factory I was running i erected a Heath Robinson thing Which drew hot air from the apex of the roof and sent it into corners of the factory. All it took were some a small fans and Drainpipes. I was testing it asa method of heating Railway stations. For which, combined with air curtains it was low tech, cheap and easy.
A bit like again in the 70’s I cut the wires to the heater in a tumble dryer. The clothes took a little longer but I saved hundreds. But please do not attempt that unless you know what you are doing.
Very interesting Harold,
An absolutely splendid article. Which ‘ll keep me worrying for a long time.
Complicated. Why not use what we already have. It sounds like faffing about for the sake of it. We get to a difficlult bit and it’s home insulation etc. That was lucky.
I suspect this is engineers trying to drag politicians balls out of the fire. ’cause they’re frightened of nuke, and we’re running out of amps.
There is no doubt this is ingenious. But the costsof all this kit. It’s astonomically big. And we’re destroying our options.Recycle the pipes.
I am trying to work out whether it would use the rest of my remaining life to check out the various factors like the Accountancy , the chemistry, the deposit ratios, geology, and politics. Never mind unintended consequences
If all the tidal generators in the world were damned, Would the world actually wobble
Excellent.
Yes Harold that’s a nice exposition, but it doesn’t help ME ( and probably many others including industry) at this moment.
There is no gas supply to my house, nor the village I live in
Most people use oil, I use anthracite,the chap across the road did rig up some form of electrical heating, but it proved so costly he has now changed to oil which is still extortionate anyway.12 years ago I made enquirers about heat pumps apparently a ground one cost about £30k, although if some sort of district heating could be evolved costs could be lowered substantially, but installation costs would rise proportionately
Anyway gas isn’t all that bad and ours may be running out, but there’s plenty around the globe and probably loads still unfounded never mind untapped and ther’s also plenty of shale gas.
Oh and what about Hydrogen power I saw a big advert the other day, seems it can not only drive buses and trucks and trains and shops but it can drive an aeroplane (don’t think I would fancy flying in one just yet – I have a friend who works for a German car maker, he says their future is hydrogen not electric
Roger. Hydrogen (with Oxygen,or air.) is pretty powerful stuff. If I remember my chemistry lessons from over 60 years ago one can get it by “splitting” water(H2O) into Hydrogen and Oxygen by electrolysis. For that you need electricity…Do we go in circles?
It takes quite a lot of electricity to produce hydrogen.
I think that producing hydrogen with electricity is only viable with cheap electric power, such as hydro.
Or wind turbines…
and hydrogen goes BANG
I have a gas supply to my house but I don’t use it.
So, no meter rental charges.
It is a passive house, I export three times more energy than I use (Solar PV).
Massive insulation.
I have a small wood burning stove. It’s a rural area so the wood is free.