Wind RushWind Rush
Wind Rush Files
Wind Rush 6 - CO2 Emissions
Last updated April 2008
The relevant sections of The Case Against Windfarms can be found on www.countryguardian.net . In the case of CO2 emissions there are four sections which are relevant to this big subject:
www.countryguardian.net/Case Government. htm
www.countryguardian.net/Case Calculating.htm
www.countryguardian.net /Case comparisons.htm
www.countryguardian.net/Case App 2 Calculations.htm
In this Wind Rush file we provide links to up-to-date material on Government legislation, and actual cases, basically in date order, starting with the most recent.
31/3/2008
“Government wants clean power projects abroad to count towards UK quota”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/mar/29/renewableenergy.climatechange
John Vidal, environment editor The Guardian, Saturday March 29 2008
Britain is seeking to change the rules governing renewable energy targets to make it easier for the UK to fulfil its commitment to promote clean energy, the Guardian has learned.
At present, only 3% of the UK 's power comes from renewable energy, but ministers have agreed to increase this fivefold within 12 years. To help reach this goal, the government has started lobbying the EU over the way the target is calculated.
At a closed session of the energy council of ministers this month, the business minister, Lady Vadera, proposed that British investments in renewable energy anywhere in the world should count as part of UK 's effort.
In a speech that astonished European renewable energy companies, environment groups and other EU energy ministers, she said: "It is imperative that cost-efficiency is at the heart of our approach ... Demand for renewable energy projects outside the EU should be considered [part of the renewable target]."
She also appealed to Europe to allow all EU countries to count carbon "saved" from coal-fired stations fitted with equipment that captures harmful greenhouse gas emissions. The electricity generated by this "clean coal" would then count as renewable energy and go towards UK national targets. "Member states might be further incentivised to support carbon capture projects if they were allowed in some way to contribute to the 2020 [renewable] targets," she said.
Environmental groups regard both proposals as a way for Britain to put off or scale back on increasing renewable energy through windfarms, hydroelectric and solar energy initiatives.
Last year the Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (Dberr) attempted to dilute EU renewable targets. Gordon Brown ordered a rethink on how Britain addressed renewables when leaked papers from Dberr were published in the Guardian.
Last night renewable energy companies and environment groups reacted with alarm. "This would kill renewable energy in Britain ," said Dale Vince, chief executive of Ecotricity , Britain 's biggest windfarm company. "It makes a mockery of any attempts to address climate change. The idea that we can build wind farms or other renewable energy projects [abroad] and then offset them against the UK target is outrageous. If it were possible to build projects anywhere in the world where planning is lax, nothing would be done in the UK ."
John Sauven, director of Greenpeace, added: "This would allow a UK minister to lay the foundation stone of a power station in China and say it counts as our contribution to European renewable energy targets."
"Yet again Britain is found trying to evade its environmental responsibilities," said a spokesman for the environment group WWF.
The proposals to the EU have heightened concern among the groups that the UK is on a course for a massive nuclear power programme. The energy secretary, John Hutton, argued this week that Britain should not just replace existing nuclear plants but greatly expand the nuclear and coal industries.
This week's state visit by President Sarkozy confirmed that the powerful French nuclear industry will be encouraged to develop at least four but possibly more nuclear power stations in Britain .
Industry recognises that nuclear power and renewables in Britain are mutually exclusive because they both need government support as well as the same national grid infrastructure to distribute electricity. Last week Carlo de Riva, chief executive of French state-owned nuclear company EDF, said British backing for renewables, would undermine nuclear power.
"If you provide incentives for renewables ... that will displace the incentives built into the carbon market. In effect, carbon gets cheaper. And if carbon gets cheaper, you depress the returns for all the other low-carbon technologies. [like nuclear power]."
2. 'Japan Cries Foul on Kyoto Protocol'
The Kyoto Protocol has been doomed for a long time, but the final nail in the coffin was surely driven home this week by, of all countries, Japan, and with eponymous élan too. Takao Kitabata, the Vice-Minister of Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, is reported as saying ‘Japan wants easier target for greenhouse gas cuts’, (International Herald Tribune, March 24):
"What happened in Kyoto was that we were forced to swallow disadvantageous conditions for diplomatic reasons..."
Just wonderful! Thus the truth emerges as world economic realities bite ...
Read in full at: www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/ 24 /asia/AS-GEN-Japan-Climate-Change.php
3 . Inquiry into the EU’s 20 percent renewable energy target
Source: House of Commons - Uncorrected Oral Evidence
26.03.08
March 17 2008
Tim Abraham, director of EU energy policy
Chris Barton, director of UK renewable energy strategy project
Duarte Figueira, director of renewables deployment, BERR.
The chairman began by asking how achievable the targets for renewable energy are. Tim Abraham answered by talking about the EU. He said the targets are “ambitious”. Chris Barton answered from the UK perspective, commented that the targets are ambitious but possible and there needs to be a tenfold investment in renewables over the next ten years to meet them, the estimated cost to the UK by 2020 is approximately £5 billion a year.
Barton said; “on current policies we will not hit that target”.
Abraham was asked to outline the “formal position” on the targets and the 15 per cent allocation to the UK . Abraham commented that they are a “proposal”.
The chairman asked about hydro power and the use of the Severn Barrage. Abraham said that the potential of the Barrage is “enormous”.
Lord Walpole asked if microgeneration was an important part of achieving the targets. Barton stated it is important in two ways, in terms of absolute generation and in changing attitudes and behaviour.
Barton commented that nuclear power would not be included in the targets.
Other issues discussed in the session include security of supply, the “intermittency” issue of renewable energy, transmission losses, the renewables obligation, the Renewables Advisory Board, Ofgem’s rules for regulating gas and electricity grids, grid access and offshore generation.
25 March 2008
click here to read online
< http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/lduncorr/eub170308ev1.pdf>
4. A consultant’s report, commissioned by the UK government, estimates the cost of attempting to meet the EU target for 20% of energy consumption to be met by renewables by 2020.
"The Central Case least cost scenario estimates the efficient annual incremental cost of meeting the target in 2020 to be EUR18.8bn, with the lifetime cost of the policy (the 'lifetime costs') being EUR259bn."
"The incremental abatement cost in 2020 is EUR49/tCO2 and EUR82/tCO2 in the UK , with the incremental cost in the transport sector being an order of magnitude higher (EUR276/tCO2 for the EU and EUR259/tCO2)"
The full report from consultancy POYRY
(Compliance costs meeting the 20 Renewable Energy Target in 2020– a report to the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. March 2008 :
can be downloaded from < http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file45238.pdf>
5. Government figures hide scale of CO2 emissions, says report
The Guardian, 17 Mar 08
John Vidal, environment editor
Britain 's climate change emissions may be 12% higher than officially
stated, according to a National Audit Office investigation which has
strongly criticised the government for using two different carbon
accounting systems. There is "insufficient consistency and
coordination" in the government's approach, the NAO said.
Using one system, which the government presents to the UN and in
public, Britain emitted 656m tonnes of CO2 in 2005, and claims an
improvement on 1990 figures. However, the lesser-known but more
accurate data in the government's national environmental accounts show
emissions to be in the region of 733m tonnes in 2005, a NAO report
says today.
"There are two different bases on which the government reports
emissions: that required for the UN, and the environmental accounts
prepared for the Office of National Statistics ... [which are] more
comprehensive as they include aviation and shipping emissions. They
present UK progress in reducing emissions in a markedly different
light", says the report.
The report says there have been "no reductions in UK emissions" if
measured by the national accounts method.
The figures contained in the report fly in the face of consistent
government claims that it is reducing emissions. Last week the
environment minister, Phil Woolas, said in a Commons written answer:
" UK greenhouse gas emissions have fallen by 16.4% since 1990. We
remain on course to nearly double our Kyoto Protocol target over the
2008-12 period."
Last night opposition parties and environment groups accused the
government of misleading the public at a time when the UK claims to be
leading the world in achieving reductions. "This report raises
profound questions about the credibility of the government's approach
to reducing carbon emissions. In the absence of reliable and honest
reporting the results could be potentially disastrous", said Peter
Ainsworth, shadow secretary of state for the environment.
"Labour's claim that Britain 's carbon footprint is shrinking is a
scam. The figures on aviation are being fiddled, meaning the
government can give the green light to airport expansion without most
of the subsequent rise in emissions being counted", said Robin Oakley,
of Greenpeace.
The 40-page NAO report found that government departments interpreted
data in different contexts and for different purposes, "in one case
within the same document on successive pages".
The report said the government's many targets and timetables for
reducing different combinations of greenhouse gases were confusing.
The UK has a Kyoto target of 12.5% reduction in all greenhouse gases
by 2012, an EU target of reducing 20-30% of CO2, three domestic goals
ranging between 20-60% of CO2 and is in the process of drafting a new
climate change bill .
"The targets can be assessed against different bases. There is
"considerable scope" for aggregating and presenting data in different
ways", the NAO said.
Read the full NAO report at:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/04-05/0405210.pdf
6.Source: House of Commons - Written Answers [Renewable Energy Targets]
19.03.08 Renewable Energy
John McDonnell:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform whether his Department is on course to meet the target to (a) source at least 10 per cent. of its electricity from renewables by 31 March 2008 and (b) increase recycling figures to 40 per cent. of waste by 2010. [165934]
Mr. Thomas:
The information requested is as follows.
(a) The Department has purchased electricity from renewable sources since 1999. All HQ buildings are supplied with green electricity where the Department is responsible for the purchase of electricity supply which compares favourably to the Sustainable Development target for energy target which is to buy 10 per cent. by 2008.
(b) BERR has implemented various initiatives for meeting the Sustainable Development target for waste and recycling. The percentage of total waste arisings from the HQ estate sent for recycling was 55.1 per cent. against a target of 40 per cent. by 2010.
Jenny Willott:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform what estimate he has made of the potential electricity generating capacity of (a) wind power, (b) solar photovoltaics and (c) geothermal technologies in the UK; and if he will make statement. [192947]
Malcolm Wicks:
The Department assessed the potential for offshore wind power in Future Offshore—a Strategic Framework for the Offshore Wind Industry. The potential wind resource around England , Wales and Scotland —assuming the installation of three-megawatt turbines at a separation distance of 500 metres and with a load factor of 40 per cent.—is 919 gigawatts.
A number of external studies have estimated the potential onshore wind resource. However, Government have not made a formal estimate of the possible electricity generation capacity from this source as we believe that it should be for the market to identify potential sites and bring forward appropriate projects that are economic, with support from the renewables obligation.
We commissioned a study on the potential for microgeneration completed in 2005. Further information on this can be found at:
http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file27558.pdf
We have recently commissioned research which is due to be completed by spring 2008 which will quantify the future potential of microgeneration of wind power, solar photovoltaics and geothermal (by geothermal we assume you are referring to ground source heat pumps).
We will be considering the available evidence and commissioning further work as necessary as part of developing the renewable energy strategy. HC Deb 18 March 2008 cc989W-990W
7. THE KYOTO PROTOCOL AND GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION
(via CCnet)
"In this paper, we propose that a more corruptible government may be more responsive to the demands of the environmental lobby. We use several stratified hazard models and panel data from 170 countries on the timing of Kyoto Protocol ratification to test this hypothesis. We find that increased environmental lobby group activity raises the probability of ratification, and the effect rises with the degree of corruption."
FULL PAPER at:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/418j29v074015487/fulltext.pdf
By Dieter Helm
13 March 2008
The Wall Street Journal Europe
(Copyright (c) 2008, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
EU leaders will gather today and tomorrow in Brussels to sign off on the European Commission's proposals to cut carbon emissions by 20% by 2020 -- with the added bait of a 30% reduction if the U.S. and other countries make meaningful commitments. For the U.S. , it appears that the question is no longer about whether it will adopt targets, but rather about how and what.
To some this all looks like good progress. Yet it is based upon the very shaky arithmetic of the Kyoto Protocol and its legacy. The Kyoto framework looks at the emissions that countries produce within their borders, and this is seductively flattering. Both the U.S. and Europe have seen their CO2 output growth slowing even as economic growth has marched on. It might appear that economic growth and emissions have been decoupled.
The 2006 Stern report seemed to confirm this rosy scenario, suggesting that additional emissions cuts could be achieved at the comparatively trivial cost of around 1% of gross domestic product.
But this is just smoke and mirrors. The projected growth of global emissions clearly tracks the growth of energy demand. The world's CO2 output is likely to increase by some 50% by 2030, paralleling the growth of energy demand and economic growth. There is no global decoupling.
But, say the U.S. and the Europeans, this is because of China and India and their failure to match our emissions reductions. The U.S. in particular insists that any post-Kyoto agreement must, at a minimum, involve emissions caps on China as well. And in one sense the Americans are right: There will be no solution to global warming if China builds 1,000 new coal power stations in the next couple of decades.
This is, however, only half right. The critical question is: Who "owns" the emissions? China is an energy-intensive, export-oriented country. It makes many of the highly polluting industrial products which used to be made in the U.S. and Europe . We exported our smoke-stack industries to developing countries like China and import their products.
If this carbon outsourcing is factored back in, the U.K. 's impressive emissions cuts over the past two decades don't look so impressive anymore. Rather than falling by over 15% since 1990, they actually rose by around 19%. And even this is flattering, since the U.K. closed most of its coal industry in the 1990s for reasons unrelated to climate change. No doubt, recalculating the figures for other European countries and the U.S. would reveal a similar pattern.
After all, the U.S. and the EU together account for nearly half of world GDP. And it is consumption, not production, that matters. This means that if global warming is to be limited, the U.S. and Europe will have to take much more drastic action to reduce those emissions embedded in their own consumption. Their appropriate emissions-reduction targets will have to be based on the consumption of goods that cause those emissions in the first place.
This not only means that the true scale of required emissions reductions in the Western world will be much higher but that the impact on economic growth and living standards there will also be more severe than so far believed.
Politicians like to cite the 1% of GDP quoted in the Stern report, as this sounds like a manageable figure. But they delude themselves and the voters by not looking at the small print. The report says it would cost 1% of GDP only if there is an optimal use of new technology. The report also assumes that there will be no policy costs, meaning the implementation of new technology will effectively be cost-free.
A moment's reflection tells us otherwise. There is no evidence that policy designed to reduce emissions is going to be optimal or efficient. In the U.K. , for example, official figures indicate renewables have turned out to be staggeringly expensive. Some wind-generated energy, for example, has cost between GBP 280 and GBP 510 per ton of carbon abated. This compares with the GBP 10- GBP 20 per ton price of carbon on the European emissions trading market.
But even these astonishing costs pale into insignificance against biofuels. The inefficient and costly production of ethanol in the U.S. , which may not even be carbon-neutral, is perhaps only topped by such examples as Indonesia , where virgin rainforest is being cut down to grow palm oil. There is no reason at all to believe that these enormous policy costs are about to be rectified. On the contrary: The recent EU commitments to biofuels and renewables are very likely to compound the damage.
The U.S. and Europe refuse to acknowledge that halting the relentless rise in the concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will take a significant slice out of economic growth. It will probably mean living standards will have to be cut if our consumption is going to be environmentally sustainable. We are simply living beyond our -- and the planet's -- means.
This is not a welcome message for politicians to give to their voters. But it happens to be what is required to tackle this global crisis. Not since the late 1930s, in the run-up to World War II, has such a massive restructuring of major economies been required. Nobody told the British or American people then that the challenge of creating a wartime economy was going to be cheap. They should stop pretending that the enormous challenge of decarbonising the major economies can be done on the cheap, either.
Mr. Helm is a professor of energy policy at Oxford .
[ Editor’s Note. This biographical note is a considerable understatement. Dr Helm is arguably the most influential expert on Energy in the UK – MAH]
Dieter Helm is an economist, specialising in utilities, infrastructure, regulation and the environment, and concentrates on the energy, water and transport sectors in Britain and Europe .
He is Professor at the University of Oxford and a Fellow of New College, Oxford . He holds a number of advisory board appointments, including Chairman of the Academic Panel, Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and member of the Advisory Panel on Energy and Climate Security, Department of Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. He was a member of the DTI Sustainable Energy Policy Advisory Board, 2002-2007 and of the Prime Minister's Council of Science and Technology, 2004-2007.
He is associate editor of the Oxford Review of Economic Policy. His career to date has spanned academia, public policy and business. He founded OXERA in 1982, was a member of the DTI's Energy Advisory Panel from 1993-2003, and has published extensively on economic topics.]
9. Fantasy Politics
EUREFERENDUM Blog 11.3.08
Less than a month ago, we were reporting on how the EU member state governments, when confronted with the economic reality of implementing their fantasy 20 percent cut in CO2 emissions, were demurring at the potential costs and seeking ways to reduce their impact.
The point was that these self-same governments had agreed those very cuts at the spring European Council the year before. Following that experience, with the next spring council due this Thursday and Friday, you would think they might have learned a lesson or two.
But this is the European Union we are talking about and, to expect rational behaviour is to neglect the effect of the unreal world inhabited by the "colleagues" as they get round the table in Brussels .
Thus it is, according to Reuters, that "EU leaders" are this week to call on the EU commission "to draw up a road map for deeper cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, going beyond a unilateral target agreed in the fight against climate change."
Already, a draft final statement has been prepared by the EU's Slovenian presidency. It employs the mind-numbing language that the "colleagues" so love, declaring: "Stepping up to the more ambitious 30 percent reduction target as part of a global and comprehensive agreement needs to be built in explicitly, and in a balanced, transparent and equitable way."
And in a "balanced, transparent and equitable way", EU leaders will put their names to this fantasy document and walk away to collect the headlines. Their civil servants, on the other hand - individually and collectively - will tear their hair out, in full knowledge that the target is unachievable. Not only that, they must be aware that each of the member states governments have no intention whatsoever of even trying.
Nevertheless, Mr Brown will solemnly commend to our local parliament on Monday, in his ritual post council statement, the new targets. So life will go on, with MPs performing their usual role as a captive audience in what can only be described as fantasy politics.
What really gives the game away in this context is that, as Reuters reports, the Slovenian statement does not offer detailed plans on how the EU intends to achieve this deeper cut. Bearing in mind that the current crop of "leaders" have no idea of how they are going to achieve the 20 percent cut already agreed, this is wholly predictable. But it does make you wonder about the sanity of those involved in this process, where reality can be suspended, not only once but again and again and again.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Posted by Richard North
10. Centrica warns carbon targets will push bills up further
By Danny Fortson, Business Correspondent
Friday, 22 February 2008
British Gas's owner Centrica has warned that the Government's ambitious targets to cut carbon emissions mean that energy bills will continue to rise as the industry is forced to invest in cleaner, more expensive generation such as wind and nuclear.
"Looking at the long term, moving to a low carbon economy certainly means more expensive energy," said Nick Luff, Centrica's finance director. The prediction came as the country's biggest energy supplier sought to deflect public fury over a massive rise in profits that were unveiled just a month after it raised household gas and electricity prices by 15 per cent. Coinciding with the outcry, Ofgem, the energy regulator, announced an inquiry into the gas and electricity supply markets, the 15th inquiry launched in the past seven years.
The regulator said it launched the inquiry despite having "no clear evidence that the market is failing" but acknowledged the public perception of the market, controlled by six big suppliers who largely move in tandem when setting rates, was worrying.
Centrica argues that profits – which rose to £2.1bn from £130m the year before – are necessary to reinvest in new projects. Mr Luff pointed out that the company invested more than £1bn in new generation sources and gas fields last year, and plans to invest as much in every year through to 2010. Only a fifth of that figure was devoted to renewable energy sources last year, which was mainly into wind farms at Lynn and Inner Dowsing. These will come on stream later this year. Mr Luff said that the company would likely increase its commitment to renewable energy given the requirement, passed down recently by the European Commission, to increase renewable generation in the UK from 5 per cent to 40 per cent by 2020.
The Government's plan to increase wind energy generation from its current 1gw to 33gw by 2020 will require – by Centrica's estimate of £2bn for each gigawatt of wind power – an investment of £66bn. When taken with the Government's additional goal of building a generation of new nuclear power stations, a task which could cost another £20bn, and upgrading the gas and electricity grids, total investment in new power generation over the next 15 years could surpass £100bn.
The Government has done little to communicate the huge investment required, which will inevitably translate into much higher household energy bills.
Mr Luff said Centrica was talking with various partners about making equity investments in new nuclear projects, but declined to say with whom it would partner. The company is also in talks with national oil companies in Egypt, Norway, Nigeria and Trinidad over securing long-term gas supply contracts for period of 15 to 20 years that will alleviate its dwindling resources in the North Sea. Centrica produces 30 per cent of its own gas but buys the rest.
Nearly all of British Gas profits came in the first part of the year when the company lagged in dropping its retail prices after wholesale gas prices plummeted. It margins shrunk to 1 per cent as wholesale gas prices soared again, though as its residential business began to suffer, its upstream business performed better. That vertically integrated model that allows the company to benefit in either situation provides fodder for its critics who accuse the company
The Independent – Business
22/2/2008
11. Scotland aims to lead world in global warming battle
The Scotsman, 30 Jan 08
By HAMISH MACDONELL
AMBITIOUS new targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions were set out
yesterday by Scottish ministers, who urged the world to follow their
lead to tackle climate change.
John Swinney, the finance secretary, said Scotland would cut
greenhouse gases by 80 per cent by 2050 – a third more than the UK
target over the same period.
Mr Swinney said the Scottish Government would be tied to annual
targets and to a tough new regime of scrutiny to make sure the overall
reduction was achieved.
This will mean big changes in electricity generation, moving away from
fossil fuels to renewables and heavy investment in clean coal
technology and carbon capture.
More solar panels and wind turbines on Scottish homes, more recycling
and tougher regulations on new buildings will also be introduced to
meet the targets.
But both the Scottish Government and opposition politicians
acknowledge that Scotland 's achievements will count for very little
without the same sort of commitment elsewhere in the world.
The Chinese government has set a target of a 10 per cent cut in
emissions by 2010 while India has set an equally modest target of a 25
per cent cut by 2020.
The United States still has no national target for a cut in emissions,
although all the main candidates to replace George Bush as president
next year have promised to introduce nationwide targets for the first
time.
Even the European Union, which has been leading the arguments for
proper greenhouse gas reduction targets, only has a target of a 20 per
cent reduction from 1990 levels by 2020.
Mr Swinney said: "It's essential that we tackle global warming as a
planetary issue. We hope and believe that by announcing such ambitious
targets for ourselves, that can, in itself, help to tackle it. But
just as importantly, we hope it will encourage other nations around
the world to follow suit. It is essential that happens because we have
to tackle this on a global basis."
Maf Smith, director of the Sustainable Development Commission
Scotland , added: "Governments across the world are shying away from
taking the necessary action. The Scottish Government must be commended
for its intention to lead the way for other countries."
But Patrick Harvie, a Green MSP, said more needed to be done. "Even if
Scotland meets the minister's ambitious targets to reduce pollution,
we still need to see a concerted international action to make a real
difference."
The 80 per cent target was chosen because that is the level of
reduction scientists believe is necessary to have a 50 per cent chance
of avoiding a dangerous rise in global temperatures.
It was set and agreed by scientists and published in the Climatic
Change Journal last year as the best estimate to measure climate
change and the best way to combat it.
Mr Harvie said that climate change experts had warned that a 90 per
cent reduction was actually now required to stave off a dangerous rise
in global temperatures.
Mr Swinney announced the new target as part of a consultation on the
Scottish Government's Climate Change Bill, which was launched yesterday.
Environmentalists, business leaders and members of the public are
being invited to contribute to the consultation, which will then be
used to fashion the legislation.
The consultation set out a number of areas where action is needed. But
instead of demanding new standards for each area, ministers have kept
the paper vague and non-specific, asking instead for submissions
before making definitive judgments for each area.
Professor Thomas Crowley, a global expert in climate change, said he
believed the 80 per cent target was "ambitious but achievable".
Prof Crowley, a professor of geo-sciences based in Edinburgh , said
Scotland would have a better chance of hitting the tough new limits
than almost anywhere else in the world, because of the potential for
renewables and the collective political will to drive the issue forward.
He added it would be difficult but possible. "I don't think it's
crazy. It might be very ambitious but it is conceivable that it will
be achievable," he said.
THE KEY AREAS
Microgeneration
Many more people are expected to have their own forms of electricity
generation in their homes by 2050.
The usual forms will be wind turbines or solar panels, although some
people will tap into underground heat sources or use biomass –
biological material like wood or animal waste – as fuel.
Microgeneration plants can be used to produce electricity for the home
or business. Jason Ormiston, chief executive of Scottish Renewables,
said: "Everyone has a responsibility at home to consider whether they
can use microgeneration.
"It's not easy in all circumstances. We recognise that and we should
make it easy. Indeed, it should be as easy to buy a solar panel as it
is to buy a flat-screen TV. We are talking here, mainly, about
converting existing buildings."
Combined heat and power
Combined heat and power is a relatively new way of saving energy and
heat. Power stations divert heat, which would have gone up into the
atmosphere, into electricity or use it to warm other buildings.
It can used on different scales, from a power station next to a major
industrial site like a refinery, down to the level of a generating
station for a small community. The use of combined heat and power
stations is expected to increase dramatically over the next few decades.
Peter Smith, of the Combined Heat and Power Association, said:
"Combined heat and power is incredibly efficient and cost-effective
way of reducing these emissions.
If combined heat and power was to grow, it would be a huge benefit to
the environment."
Cutting emissions and heat loss from buildings
New buildings are constructed to rigorous new energy standards, but
most people live in older houses – many from the Victorian era or even
earlier – almost all of which are poor at heat retention.
Mike Thornton, director, Scotland , for the Energy Saving Trust, said
there were about 600,000 homes without cavity wall insulation in
Scotland and tens of thousands which either had no roof insulation or
were under-insulated. "There are large numbers of simple,
cost-effective measures which can be done and installed by homeowners
to reduce emissions and which will also save them money," he said.
By 2050, it will be unusual for homes not to have good insulation and
for heating bills to be much lower than they are now.
Waste and recycling
More and more people are recycling their waste, rather than dumping it
in landfill sites.
This has two direct benefits. It helps save raw materials – as
recycled material is used over and over again – and it helps reduce
landfill sites, which produce methane, a greenhouse gas. To hit the
Scottish Government's emission targets, there will have to be more
recycling and less waste. Lisa Macleod, from the Scottish Waste
Awareness Group, said Scotland had improved, but there was a long way
to go.
"We need to move away from landfill sites," she said.
"They emit the powerful greenhouse gas methane, which is over 20 times
more potent than carbon dioxide, and if we are to play our part in the
fight against climate change, we must significantly reduce our
greenhouse gas emissions."
Carbon storage
This is a method of keeping carbon dioxide deep underground or under
the sea.
Ministers believe it has the potential to deal with 90 per cent of the
carbon dioxide from Scotland 's fossil-fuel power stations, without
that gas going into the atmosphere.
As these power stations produce most greenhouse gases in Scotland ,
that would go a long way to meeting the Scottish Government's target.
Dan Barlow, the acting director of WWF Scotland, said: "This is a way
of preventing carbon emissions from going into the atmosphere and we
need to do that if we are going to reduce emissions sufficiently to
prevent a temperature rise of two degrees. Work is required to make
sure sites
are identified where there is no risk of leakage, but there is a need
for it globally, alongside a growth in renewables."
The public sector
This makes up a quarter of Scottish employment and accounts for the
vast majority of the public buildings – including schools and hospitals.
It is the focus of government attention because ministers can regulate
it and demand new standards in a way they cannot for the private sector.
Jason Ormiston, the chief executive of Scottish Renewables, said:
"Some local authorities and some public buildings have done very well,
the Scottish Natural Heritage building in Inverness is top drawer in
energy efficiency and micro-generation systems."
Mr Ormiston said that he expected public-private contracts to be
redrawn, forcing private companies to meet tough new environmental
standards if they are building for the public sector.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/britain-will-need-12500-wind-farms-to-satisfy-eu-targets-773145.html
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
Thursday, 24 January 2008
In a mere dozen years, the amount of UK electricity generated by renewable technologies such as wind, wave and tidal power will have to reach nearly half the national total, under ambitious plans put forward by the European Commission in Brussels.
The remarkable eight-fold expansion, from today's 5 per cent to about 40 per cent by 2020, or even more, represents a true energy revolution comparable in scale to the arrival of North Sea oil.
Most of it will have to be delivered by wind energy, especially offshore, as wind is the most developed technology available.
The number of wind turbines on land in Britain is likely to grow from just under 2,000 now to 5,000, according to the British Wind Energy Association. But the really substantial increase will be in offshore wind, with turbines installed in the seas around Britain 's coasts likely to increase from just under 150, to about 7,500.
Meeting the target will also increase pressure on the Government to go ahead with the controversial tidal barrage across the Severn estuary, which is opposed by some conservationists on the grounds that it may damage valuable and protected wildlife sites.
But the tidal power the gigantic, 10-mile dam could provide about 5 per cent of Britain 's electricity demand on its own. An initial study into the Severn barrage was announced by the Government on Tuesday. The new renewables regime – which does not include nuclear power – will also mean a rise in electricity prices, with EU officials yesterday suggesting it would be of the order of 15 per cent across the community, on top of any other energy price rises, by 2020.
The target outlined is double what the Government had in mind until recently in its most ambitious renewable energy projections, but when it is signed off by the EU member states, which is expected to happen some time in the next year, it will be legally binding.
Failure to meet it would mean Britain being dragged before the European Court .
It is part of the wide-ranging EU climate and energy strategy released yesterday, which commits the community as a whole to cut its total emissions of greenhouse gases by 20 per cent by 2020, and to source 20 per cent of its total energy demand from renewable sources by the same date.
EU heads of government, including Tony Blair for Britain , agreed these headline figures a year ago, but yesterday the Brussels Commission revealed how it proposed to share the burden among the 27 member states.
Britain will have to increase its renewable energy proportion of all energy demand, which includes transport and heating as well as electricity, from the current level of 1.3 per cent, the lowest figure in Europe apart from Malta and Luxembourg , to 15 per cent.
This implies an increase in the renewable proportion of UK electricity alone, from a fraction under 5 per cent currently, to about 40 per cent. These figures are still only proposals from Brussels , and will be the subject of horse-trading between the member states.
But it is unlikely that they can be changed substantially, and yesterday the Business Secretary of State, John Hutton, indicated that Britain would not be fighting too hard against them.
Mr Hutton said: "The UK remains committed to meeting its share of the EU renewables target, and the Commission's proposals are a welcome starting point for that discussion."
The proposals were widely welcomed yesterday by green groups.
14. UK welcomes EU climate change proposals
DEPARTMENT FOR BUSINESS, ENTERPRISE AND REGULATORY REFORM News Release
issued by The Government News Network on 23 January 2008
The UK today welcomed the European Commission's ambitious proposals
for tackling climate change and delivering a low carbon economy in Europe .
The package contains proposals to implement the decisions agreed by EU
Heads of State and Government at the 2007 Spring European Council,
including a 20 per cent reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions by
2020, increasing to 30 per cent when there is an international climate
agreement; 20 per cent of total EU energy consumption to come from
renewables by 2020; and measures to support the development of carbon
capture and storage (CCS) including up to twelve CCS demonstration
projects.
The proposals put the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) at the heart
of EU climate policy, including establishing an EU-wide central cap on
emissions covered by the EU ETS to 2020 and beyond, ensuring both
scarcity and certainty, changed from the current system of Member
States setting emissions caps for their own economies.
For the UK, the Commission's proposals include:
* A reduction of 16 per cent in UK greenhouse gas emissions from
sectors not covered by the EU ETS by 2020 from 2005 levels;
* For 15 per cent of the energy consumed in the UK to come from
renewable sources by 2020;
* For 10 per cent of road transport fuels to come from renewable
sources, subject to them being produced in a sustainable way.
Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said that the proposals sent a clear
signal to the world that Europe was taking decisive action to fight
climate change.
"This plan shows exactly what we are aiming for globally - a
comprehensive and effective agreement to tackle climate change, with
the carbon market at its heart. With a global deal, the EU will up its
commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 30 per cent by 2020.
"Setting a clear long-term downward trajectory for the emissions cap
for the EU ETS gives businesses and the market the certainty they've
been looking for.
"I support the clear message from the Commission that there should be
much more auctioning in the EU ETS. We would like to see increasing
minimum levels of auctioning that allow Member States to set higher
levels unilaterally. We will consult on this and the rest of the
detail of the EU ETS review in the spring."
"More work must be done in a number of areas, including looking
closely at the proposed UK contribution from the whole economy, rather
than just the non-traded sector. The UK is determined to play its part
in full, but we should ensure that there is collective effort from all
Member States to play their part in meeting the EU target."
Business Secretary John Hutton outlined the UK 's plans to review its
strategy to meet the UK share of the EU renewables target:
"The UK remains committed to meeting its share of the EU renewables
target which will be decided in the negotiations ahead, and the
Commission's proposals are a welcome starting point for that
discussion. Whatever the final outcome, the UK is already scoping a
vast expansion of wind energy offshore and tidal power on the Severn ,
and we are already thoroughly reviewing our strategy to drive progress
further.
"Other low carbon technologies must be part of the mix too. The
Commission's proposals on removing regulatory barriers to Carbon
Capture and Storage are vital. Demonstration of this globally
significant technology must happen as soon as possible and I hope that
the UK's demonstrator plant, expected to be up and running by 2014,
can fully participate in EU initiatives on CCS demonstration.
"This package will show the EU's continuing global leadership on
climate change. I want to see it agreed as soon as possible to give
business the certainty it needs to plan low carbon investments with
confidence."
Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly said:
"This package demonstrates a firm commitment that transport must play
its full part in tackling climate change as well as supporting
sustainable economic growth. Action to encourage sustainable biofuels
is one of a range of measures we are taking in the UK to reduce the
impact of transport on the environment, backed by record investment in
public transport, walking and cycling.
"I welcome the inclusion in the Commission's proposals of
sustainability criteria for biofuels. These are a good starting point
for negotiation. The UK has been leading the international drive to
make sure the biofuels we use come from sustainable sources and we
will be pressing to make sure European biofuels policy also includes
strong safeguards to maximise greenhouse gas savings and protect the
environment."
Notes to Editors
1. The March 2006 UK Climate Change Programme and the May 2007 Energy
White Paper set out the Government's international and domestic
strategy for tackling climate change and ensuring supplies of secure,
clean and affordable energy. The European Commissions' proposals will
help us deliver core aspects of this strategy: delivering a market
price for carbon, increasing the share of renewable energy, and
significantly increasing the use of low carbon technologies such as
carbon capture and storage.
2. The Government's Climate Change Bill, currently before Parliament,
sets targets to reduce CO2 emissions by at least 26-32 per cent by
2020 - approximately equivalent to reducing greenhouse gases from the
whole economy by 32-37 per cent, which goes beyond the EU's proposals
for 2020.
3. The EU ETS has been operating since 1 January 2005 , with Phase II
beginning on 1 January 2008 . It currently covers around 1000
installations in the UK and more than 12 000 across the EU.
4. The draft Renewables Directive provides the framework for achieving
the EU's target of securing 20 per cent of all its energy from
renewable sources by 2020 and sets out proposed shares for the UK and
other Member States to achieve this. The Secretary of State has today
laid a written Parliamentary Statement on the Government's approach to
the Directive and UK 's Renewable Energy Strategy.
5. The Government has already introduced a range of measures to
increase the use of renewable energy in the UK . The Planning and
Energy Bills currently before Parliament will drive greater and more
rapid deployment of renewables in the UK . The Energy Bill also enables
investment in CCS.
6. During the second reading debate of the Energy Bill on 22 January,
John Hutton also announced the terms of reference for the Severn Tidal
Power feasibility study.
7. Renewable energy in transport is mainly in the form of biofuels.
From April 2008, the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) will
require fuel suppliers to ensure that a given proportion of road
transport fuel comes from renewable sources (2.5 per cent by volume in
2008-09, rising to 5 per cent from 2010-11). In 2006, it was announced
that the level of the RTFO would rise above 5 per cent after 2010-11
subject to various conditions including a requirement that the
biofuels should be sustainably produced. The Government has also
announced that from 2010-11 rewards from the RTFO should be based on
the greenhouse gas savings of the biofuel, and from 2011-12 would be
given only for biofuels that meet appropriate sustainability standards.
8. The UK is committed to meeting its fair share of the overall EU
renewable energy target. In the summer, the Department for Business
and Enterprise will launch a consultation on what more needs to be
done to meet the UK 's agreed share of the target. A webpage
http://www.berr.gov.uk/energy/sources/renewables/strategy/page43356.html
on the BERR website is now live and stakeholders can register their
interest in being involved in the consultation on the new renewable
energy strategy there. We will also consult stakeholders specifically
on the EU Renewables Directive.
9. CCS is a type of carbon abatement technology (CAT) in which the
carbon in fossil fuels is captured as CO2 either before or after
combustion, and committed to long term storage in geological
formations. Following the announcement in the 2007 Budget that the
Government will fund a commercial-scale CCS demonstration project, the
Government launched a competition in November 2007 to select a project
to be supported. The Government will provide up to 100 per cent of the
additional capital and operating costs incurred by the project
developer in successfully demonstrating the technology on a long term
commercial scale. The pre-qualifying period for the competition will
end in March 2008. Companies that successfully pre-qualify will be
invited to take part in the next stages of the competition in April
2008 with the aim of announcing the competition winner by May or June
2009. Link to competition website is
http://www.berr.gov.uk/energy/sources/sustainable/carbon-
abatement-tech/ccs-demo/page40961.html
Environment correspondent, BBC News website
Offshore wind farms may become a common sight around Britain
If the European Commission's proposals on energy amount to a "revolution", as president Jose Manuel Barroso claimed when he announced them on Wednesday, what does the revolution look like?
How will it change the face of Britain over the next 12 years?
The targets our island nation is supposed to achieve, remember, are several: a 20% jump in energy efficiency, 10% of vehicle traffic powered by biofuels, and 15% of energy derived from renewable sources.
How EU states achieve the targets is up to them; the UK already has a raft of policies in place to stimulate the growth of renewables, and may have to draw up new ones if and when the commission's proposals are endorsed by the European Parliament and Council of Ministers.
The renewables target is particularly challenging because it refers to overall energy use, rather than just electricity.
To get an idea of the scale of the challenge, look across to Sweden .
If we don't do anything in addition to what we have now, I would bet that we won't get there
Rob Gross
Because Sweden already derives 40% of its energy from renewable sources, it received a much higher target than Britain for 2020 - 49% against Britain 's 15%.
It looks steep. But in relative terms, going from 40% to 49% means building just over a quarter more than you already have.
Britain only derives 2% of its energy from renewables, and so must build six and a half times what it has now - all within the next 12 years.
As they say in sporting circles, it is a big ask.
Winding up
So where will all this energy come from?
The biggest supplier, virtually all experts agree, will be wind.
"I'd say that by 2020 we would have about 6,000 or 7,000 turbines offshore and about 5,000 onshore," says Charles Anglin from the British Wind Energy Association (BWEA).
"That alone could provide about 25%, possibly 28%, of the country's electricity."
Rob Gross, head of policy and technology assessment at the UK Energy Research Centre (UKERC), agrees.
"I would envisage seeing a number of large offshore wind farms, particularly along the east coast," he says.
Mr Barroso described the proposals as a "revolution"
Last month, Business Secretary John Hutton announced that the government wanted to see enough offshore wind farms come into operation to power all the UK 's homes - though he admitted this would bring changes to the coastline which might not be to everybody's taste.
The BWEA says there are two big issues holding back the expansion of wind power - planning, and national grid connections.
"In England and Wales , with schemes considered 'substantial' such as a housing development or a supermarket, the government sets a 16-week time limit for local authorities to make a planning decision," says Mr Anglin.
"The overall proportion of these that get decided with 16 weeks is 70%. With wind farms, it's 5%."
The government is pushing through planning legislation aimed at drastically reducing these delays, though this will not affect Scotland .
With offshore farms, the BWEA says, the time interval between a company deciding it wants to build a wind farm and the first electricity flowing into the grid can be seven years. The main issue is the procedure for getting connected to the grid, which companies see as time-consuming and laborious.
Still, a lot of wind can clearly take Britain a long way. There are technical issues with ramping up, particularly concerning the National Grid's capacity to compensate for intermittent supply - but analysis done at UKERC suggests it is less of a problem than providing cover in case a single large power station goes off line.
Barrage of ideas
The scheme that on its own could contribute more than any other would be a tidal barrage on the Severn estuary - an idea much discussed down the years, emotionally charged, and about to be evaluated again at government level.
As tide comes in, sea water passes through barrage to landward side
At high tide, sluice gates shut, trapping water in estuary or basin
When tide recedes on sea-side of barrage, sluice gates open
Water flows through barrage, driving turbines and generating power
Power can be generated in both directions, but this can affect efficiency and economics of project
With the capacity to generate about 5% of the nation's electricity, it would at a stroke take Britain about one-tenth of the way towards its 15% renewable energy target.
Do the commission's proposals make it any more likely?
"The problem is, it's such a huge capital project that financing it is a huge headache," comments Rob Gross.
"The installed capacity is equivalent to six or seven nuclear reactors; also it would take a long time to build."
Even if it makes sense in policy terms - and that is still a big "if" when all the social, economic and environmental factors are taken into account - the project may still contain too many uncertainties to make sense as an investment, without significantly more government support.
The other renewable electricity options also may need more of a push.
Solar electricity is still expensive - the commission's proposals, even if the government rushes to activate them with new initiatives, will not produce a sudden rash of photovoltaic panels on Britain's roofs - while wave and small-scale tidal technologies are years away from commercialisation.
Liquid targets
Away from electricity, areas for introducing renewable technologies include heat for homes and industrial buildings, and transport.
Biofuels - that increasingly difficult technology - are the only real option at the moment for cars and lorries.
In an attempt to eliminate the environmental and social problems that could stem from a rush to biofuels, the commission has set "sustainability criteria" which would, for example, prevent the clearance of virgin forest for biofuel crops, and mandate that biofuels must bring carbon savings of at least 35% compared with petrol and diesel.
Guidelines aim to stop biofuel production ravaging biodiversity
Whether Britain's landscape now gets covered by biofuel crops depends on a whole range of factors outside the gift of the European Commission or the British government.
How economic will the nascent British growers and refiners prove to be? How quickly will scientists develop "second generation" fuels that use plant mass much more efficiently?
"It's not clear yet what proportion of biofuels will be provided by use of land in the UK, as opposed to what's brought in from overseas," observes Mark Williamson, director of innovations at the Carbon Trust.
"We need to see how that will play out. But in any case, existing biofuels are not very efficient - in the UK , we need to think about how we support the transition to second generation fuels."
Hot topic
Which leaves the option of heat. In a way, it is the most obvious; my grandparents heated their house and water with a wood boiler, and they were far from alone in the Britain of yesteryear.
Parts of Europe - Austria , Finland , Sweden - progressively brought in more efficient ways of using the same renewable resource.
Britain switched to natural gas.
Yet Mark Williamson believes wood burning could perhaps provide 5-10% of our heating needs by 2020, principally in commercial properties which already have some of the infrastructure they would need, and which can provide a reliable market for suppliers.
"The analysis we've done suggests that where there's demand, a supply will come in," he says.
"It's a combination of waste wood and new wood; managed forestry is an option, where you grow and harvest it cyclically, so it becomes a nice sustainable source."
Shame factor
Does Britain yet have the policies in place to ensure the 15% target is met?
"If we don't do anything in addition to what we have now, I would bet that we won't get there," says Rob Gross.
He believes the government needs to look at introducing feed-in tariffs for renewable generators, as Germany has done to good effect.
Energy efficiency gains would help Britain achieve its target
Mr Hutton recently ruled that option out; though his department is looking at restructuring the existing Renewables Obligation scheme so it gives more support to "experimental" electricity generating technologies such as wave power.
On transport, the government is introducing later this year a Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) that will oblige fuel sellers to source a given proportion of what they sell from renewable sources - in other words, biofuels.
Experts bemoan the lack of support for microgeneration; but the big policy gap, many say, is on heat, where there is no real incentive to introduce sustainable wood burning on a large scale.
Without it, there seems little prospect of new forests springing up all over the country to produce wood for a million boilers.
It is pretty certain that some new policies will come in, especially if the targets look liked being missed; the embarrassment of claiming world leadership on climate change and then failing to transform our energy sector would surely be too much.
It would all be so much easier if we could improve energy efficiency - the least sexy topic in the whole energy book, something that Britain is spectacularly bad at, but most experts' choice as the single most effective measure any country can take to curb its energy use and carbon emissions.
Richard.Black-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk
Government says new 'carbon price' will favour eco-friendly policy choices
The Guardian December 22 2007
Patrick Wintour < http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/patrickwintour> , political editor
The Guardian < http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian> ,
Saturday December 22 2007
Coal-fired power stations, airport expansions and new road schemes could all be put on hold following a decision by Gordon Brown that ministers must in future take account of the true economic cost of climate change damage.
Ministers have been instructed to factor into their calculations a notional "carbon price" when making all policy and investment decisions covering transport, construction, housing, planning and energy.
That price - which will increase annually - is intended to frame all day-to-day policy and investment decisions for the next 30 years.
As a result carbon-free or clean technologies, including nuclear power, have been given a significant boost as they will now become relatively less expensive than polluting technologies.
The "shadow price for carbon", representing the cost to society of the environmental damage, has already been agreed for every year up to 2050 by government economists. It will be set at £25.50 a carbon tonne for 2007, rising annually to £59.60 a tonne by 2050.
The climate change minister, Phil Woolas, said: "This will have huge implications for [the] government. If for instance a new power station is due to cost £1bn, but it will add £200m worth of carbon emissions, we will decide that the cost of the power station is £1.2bn, even though its cash price is £1bn. We are creating a new currency."
In theory the carbon price will create a bias against roads and carbon-emitting coal stations and make new "zero carbon" building regulations appear more economic.
Decisions about investments in new nuclear power stations will be made exclusively by the private sector, but the social carbon price is likely to affect the role of regulators and make them more willing to back nuclear as opposed to other more carbon emitting energy technologies.
It has also been agreed that every major Whitehall policy and investment decision will be monitored over the next year to check that policymakers are actually incorporating the shadow price of carbon.
Woolas said: "This is far bigger than people realise. It is intellectually thought-through and very tough. Gordon Brown may not ride a bike, but by god he is showing a lead."
Tony Juniper, the head of Friends of the Earth, said the "carbon price" could change economic calculations around issues such as a third runway at Heathrow. He added: "At the moment there are gaping holes in government policy with them professing concern for climate change on one hand, and rushing to expand airports and widen roads on the other. If this helps to fill in that gap then it has to be a step in the right direction. Whether it works or not will depend on whether they have set the carbon price high enough."
The price has been set at a level calculated to ensure the government can meet its major policy target of stabilising carbon emissions at between 450 and 550 parts per million carbon, the figure recommended by the review conducted for the Treasury by Sir Nicholas Stern.
The review found that the costs of addressing climate change now will be cheaper than the costs of doing so later.
The shadow price is partly drawn from new modelling on the scale of the threat posed by climate change and partly by economic work undertaken by McKinseys and the Stern review on behalf of the Treasury on the economic costs of failing to address climate change.
The price is intended to take into account the full global costs of the damage carbon causes over the whole of its time in the atmosphere.
Equivalent values will be used for other greenhouse gases.
A note setting out the government's thinking prepared in part by the chief economist at the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Richard Price, says ministers must refer to the shadow price. It states: "It is important that the shadow price for carbon is applied consistently and universally across decisions in government with significant implications for emissions of carbon and other greenhouse gases."
17. An environmental 'stealth tax' on business could raise hundreds of millions of pounds for the taxman over the next five years
From The Times
December 17, 2007
Concern over Government’s sale of CO2 emission permits
Martin Waller
An environmental “stealth tax” on business could raise hundreds of million of pounds for the taxman over the next five years through the auction of a large chunk of the next round of carbon emission permits.
Officials from the Debt Management Office, which handles among other things gilt auctions, have been quietly sounding out City experts over how to auction 7 per cent of the emission permits issued to industry over the next five years.
These will come from the portion of the permits that would have gone free to the “large electricity producers”, according to the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). If these are forced to put up prices as a consequence, the impact will be felt most by the large industrial users.
The auction is permissible under the EU rules that set up the scheme, which set a maximum of 10 per cent that could be retained by national governments for sale.
Airlines to make billions from CO2 trade
Keeping ahead of climate change
Carbon price must rise, warns employers’ body
However, the British decision to auction 7 per cent represents the highest proportion retained by any EU country, business organisations complain.
The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme is designed to put pressure on those industries emitting carbon dioxide to cut emissions by constricting the number of allowances to produce the gas.
The next phase, Phase II, starts on January 1 and runs until the end of 2012. Next year the annual total of emission permits across the EU will be 1.9 million tonnes.
UK business is thought to get about a tenth of this, minus the Government’s 7 per cent.
There exists a forward market in CO2 permits at the European Climate Exchange in the City.
Permission to emit a tonne of CO2 is trading at €20 or more.
At this level the auction would raise hundreds of millions of pounds.
Some City sceptics question the Government’s ability to conduct such an auction, in the light of Gordon Brown’s bungled sale of the UK ’s gold reserves.
One senior trader suggested the sale should be conducted through City institutions used to dealing in derivatives and other financial instruments.
Businesses will be keen to take part in the auction because the Government’s 7 per cent withholding will create an artificial shortage, meaning they would otherwise have to buy unwanted carbon permits on the exchange or elsewhere.
A document seen by The Times suggests there is a degree of sensitivity in Whitehall over whether the proceeds of the auction should be regarded as a tax.
Defra said: “Greenhouse gas emissions cause damage to the environment that, without policy action, no one has to pay for. Business requires a price signal for carbon in order to take full account of the cost of their emissions and to drive reductions.”
When pressed, it said: “The classification of EU ETS auctioning receipts by Eurostat (the EU office that advises on statistics) will happen in due course.”
Defra refused to comment on the potential amount that could be raised, by deduction from the current price of carbon permits being traded.
A spokesman for the Debt Management Office confirmed: “There is some discussion about how the auction system may work.”
Employers’ organisations are known to be concerned at the added burden placed on them by the requirement to bid for permits.
In some sectors, such as power generation, this could rise to 50 per cent, says Gareth Stacey, head of environmental affairs at the EEF.
If the consequent price rises are passed straight on to the consumer, these could make sectors such as steel less able to compete with other parts of the world.
Of the Phase II auction, he said: “It’s dead money. It does not in any way go to achieve what the EU is trying to achieve.”
Instead, says the EEF, the money raised could be spent on low carbon technology within the UK .
The Guardian, 10 December 2007
18. UK's official CO2 figures an illusion - study
Report reveals Britain's hidden CO2 emissions
David Adam
Britain is responsible for hundreds of millions more tonnes of
greenhouse gas emissions than official figures admit, according to a
new report that undermines UK claims to lead the world on action
against global warming.
The analysis says pollution from aviation, shipping, overseas trade
and tourism, which are not measured in the official figures, means
that UK carbon consumption has risen significantly over the past
decade, and that the government's claims to have tackled global
warming are an "illusion".
The report, from a team of economists led by Dieter Helm at Oxford
University, could prove embarrassing for British negotiators at the UN
climate summit in Bali, where they are trying to persuade countries
including the US and China to agree a new worldwide treaty to limit
the effects of global warming.
Britain is seen as a main player as the talks enter their second week,
partly because it is one of few countries on track to reduce its
emissions as required under the Kyoto protocol, the existing global
plan to curb carbon emissions.
Ministers are due to arrive for the high-level segment of the talks on
Wednesday. By Friday, they aim to agree a road map and timetable for a
treaty to succeed Kyoto in 2012.
Under Kyoto , Britain must reduce its greenhouse gas output to 12.5%
below 1990 levels by 2012. According to official figures filed with
the UN, Britain 's emissions are currently down 15% compared with 1990.
But the new report says UK carbon output has actually risen by 19%
over that period, once the missing emissions are included in the figures.
The report says: "This is a dramatic reversal of fortune. It merits an
immediate, more detailed and more robust assessment. It suggests that
the decline in greenhouse gas emissions from the UK economy may have
been to a considerable degree an illusion."
The new analysis measures the UK 's consumption of carbon, rather than
production. It includes energy consumed to make products and ship them
to the UK from countries such as China , as well as the carbon
footprint of British citizens abroad.
Helm, who is a government adviser, says: "The implications for the UK
are stark: the UK has not yet, as ministers repeatedly claim,
emphatically broken the link between economic growth and emissions. To
reduce carbon consumption in the UK would demand much more radical
policies. Excluding carbon imports and excluding aviation provides an
artificial picture. We have to take responsibility for the carbon we
consume."
The new figures, which are approximate and need more research,
threaten the government's pledge to reduce emissions by 60% by 2050,
he said.
"This puts us in a completely different starting position. We need to
move on from all the self-congratulations over [meeting the target set
by] Kyoto and look at the real effect of policies."
The report says that Britain 's success in meeting its Kyoto target is
not related to climate policies, but the result of a major shift from
coal to cleaner gas for power generation during the 1990s, and the
closure of much of the country's heavy industry.
The report says the resulting drop in carbon pollution "gives the
impression that the UK is winning the fight against climate change and
it leads people to think that the UK is reducing its dependence on
greenhouse gas emissions".
In fact, it says, "the economy's demand for greenhouse gases may have
been growing".
The new figures come as John Hutton, the business secretary, is set to
announce plans for a massive expansion in offshore wind power, which
would mean every household in Britain could be powered by offshore
wind farms.
Up to 7,000 huge turbines could be installed around the UK 's coastline
in a bid to boost the electricity generated by wind power from 2
gigawatts to 33 gigawatts by 2020.
Hutton will tell an energy conference in Berlin today: "This potential
major expansion will be subject to the outcome of a strategic
environmental assessment. But if we could manage to achieve this, by
2020 enough electricity could be generated off our shores to power the
equivalent of all of the UK 's homes. This could be a major
contribution towards meeting the EU's target of 20% of energy from
renewable sources by 2020.
"The challenge for government and for industry is to turn this
potential, for our energy and economy, into a cost-effective reality.
This will be a major challenge."
A Friends of the Earth renewable energy campaigner, Nick Rau, said the
news was "extremely welcome".
"The potential power that could be generated by this industry is
enormous. Making Britain a world leader in this form of energy will
create jobs, boost the economy and help put Britain at the forefront
in the battle to combat climate change.
"Ministers must also develop forward-thinking strategies for cutting
energy waste and developing other forms of renewable power."
Rau added: "The government should also abandon dangerous plans to
develop a new generation of nuclear reactors."
A letter in today's Guardian signed by the chief executives of 13
European car manufacturers welcomes the Bali summit and calls on those
present to "embrace sound and holistic measures to follow on from the
Kyoto agreement".
This link takes you to where you can listen to a description of what is happening in Australia 's mining industry. The huge mines are unable to excavate coal and iron ore fast enough to satisfy the demands from India and China . It is quite normal for upwards of 35 ore carriers to be queuing for a berth to take on their cargo.
So Australia is exporting fossil fuel and importing consumer goods. The bottom line is simply the carbon emissions associated with the manufacture of consumer goods is being exported. Politicians in Australia are deluding themselves if the policy of expanding the use of renewable energy in their country is thought to reduce global carbon emissions, while at the same time fossil fuels are being exported.
The same is happening in the UK - importing increasing quantities of manufactured goods only means the carbon emissions can be found in a different part of the globe.
It is a pity the green Mafiosi cannot understand the only way to cut carbon on a global basis is to reduce demand.
I found the story told here appalling; those who should know better are wantonly increasing the rate at which humans are destroying the planet. Just to maintain share price.
18. Home wind turbines in UK warming the planet: study
Published November 30, 2007 11:26 AM
http://www.enn.com/energy/article/26227
From: Reuters
LONDON (Reuters) - Many wind turbines mounted on homes in British cities are contributing to global warming, not fighting it, according to a new study.
And although many environmentally-friendly homeowners also hope to cut their bills by generating their own power, most micro-turbines will never save as much money as the equipment costs, according to the study by the Building Research Establishment Trust.
"In large urban areas such as Manchester , even with very favourable assumptions about efficiency, lifetime and maintenance, micro-wind turbines may never pay back their carbon emissions," the report says.
"Even in the most favourable location considered in the study, there is no financial payback within the expected life of the systems, with the current system and electricity costs."
The study analyzed the likely performance of three of the most common household wind turbines in Manchester and Portsmouth in England and Wick in Scotland .
In many cases -- and across most of Manchester -- more climate-warming carbon dioxide is produced in the manufacture, installation and maintenance of the turbines than they save by generating "green" power over their expected lifetime.
"These studies have shown a large variation in the expected CO2 payback periods from a few months in good locations to situations where they never pay back, in poor locations," the report says.
Only those climate-conscious homeowners in the best locations in the two smaller cities studied can expect to save more carbon dioxide than their turbines are responsible for producing.
(Reporting by Daniel Fineren; editing by James Jukwey)
page is /energy/article/26227/print
19. Official acknowledgement that wind replaces only 0.36 t CO2/MWh.
For the first time, and with Ministerial authority, CO2 emission displacement has been calculated using SDC's(Sustainable Development Commission) suggestion that gas generation is replaced. This gives us a multiplier of 0.36 t CO2/MWh compared with BWEA's 0.86 t CO2/MWh 'dirty coal' figure (SDC 2005).
The Fullabrook press release says "66 MW Fullabrook Down wind project" and "When fully operational the 22 turbine scheme will ... save almost 65,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually."
1.0 MW installed at 30% load factor produces 0.3 x 24 x 365 = 2,628 MWh/year.
Thus 66 MW at 30% load factor will produce 173,448 MWh/year
SDC's multiplier is 0.36 t CO2/MWh
and thus 173,448 x 0.36 = 62,441 t CO2/year
This is not very different from the press release's "almost 65,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions annually."
I suggest that all and every campaigner who is being assured that windpower saves 0.86 t CO2/MWh should take heed and challenge developers and planning authorities alike. It incidentally means that many previous applications have been permitted using a CO2 figure of more than twice the justifiable one.
Reference
Sustainable Development Commission (2005) Wind Power in the UK (November 2005 revised edition) p.35 last paragraph. This says "... for the purpose of this report, it has been assumed that wind output will displace the average emissions resulting from gas-fired plant... it is the figure that the DTI use and is used here so so that the carbon benefits of wind power are not overestimated." The figure cited for natural gas is "97 tC/GWh" which converts by the 44/12 multiplier to 356 t CO2/GWh, i.e. 0.36 t CO2/MWh. You must consult the November revised edition as there were errors of units in the original.