Households will have to pay up to £730 a year to fund plans to tackle climate change, it was claimed yesterday.
Under laws proposed by Brussels, Britain will be forced to generate 40% of its electricity from green sources within 12 years. Currently, the figure for wind, wave and hydroelectric power is just 2%.
To meet the target - and avoid hefty fines - energy experts say thousands more wind turbines will be needed. The move would anger anti-turbine campaigners and represent an enormous engineering challenge.
Brussels says the proposals are essential to curb global warming even though environmentalists say they do not go far enough. The European Commission claimed the package would cost the average European citizen £115 a year. Britons will pay far more because the country lags in the green energy stakes.
Open Europe, a Eurosceptic think-tank supported by Marks & Spencer boss Sir Stuart Rose, said a typical family would be paying a £730 levy by 2020.
In order to produce enough green energy by that date, Britain would need to build two giant wind turbines every day. 'Britain has such a low level of renewable energy right now, the cost of meeting this target will be higher than for most other EU countries,' said Open Europe spokesman Hugo Robinson.
The climate change plans were unveiled by Jose Manuel Barroso, the Portuguese European Commission president. The commission pledged last year to generate 20% of Europe's energy from renewable sources - such as wave, tidal, hydroelectric and wood burning - within 12 years.
Europe is demanding that 15% of all the energy used in Britain for electricity, transport and heating comes from renewables - a rise of 13% on the current level. No other country faces such a large increase. Britain is already committed to ensuring that 10% of the energy used for transport is biofuel - produced from crops rather than oil - so further opportunities for green transport fuel are limited.
David Derbyshire, Daily Mail
full article
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Monday, 21 January 2008
Abu Dhabi plots hydrogen future
The government of Abu Dhabi has announced a $15bn (£7.5bn) initiative to develop clean energy technologies.
The Gulf state describes the five-year initiative as "the most ambitious sustainability project ever launched by a government".
Components will include the world's largest hydrogen power plant.
The government has also announced plans for a "sustainable city", housing about 50,000 people, that will produce no greenhouse gases and contain no cars.
The $15bn fund, which the state hopes will lead to international joint ventures involving much more money, is being channelled through the Masdar Initiative, a company established to develop and commercialise clean energy technologies.
"As global demand for energy continues to expand, and as climate change becomes a real and growing concern, the time has come to look to the future," said Masdar CEO Dr Sultan Al Jaber.
"Our ability to adapt and respond to these realities will ensure that Abu Dhabi's global energy leadership as well as our own growth and development continues."
Technology bridge
The portfolio of technologies eligible for funding under the Masdar Initiative is extensive, but solar energy is likely to be a major beneficiary.
The hydrogen plant, meanwhile, will link the world's currently dominant technology, fossil fuel burning, with two technologies likely to be important in a low-carbon future - carbon sequestration and hydrogen manufacture.
Hydrogen will be manufactured from natural gas by reactions involving steam, producing a mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide.
The CO2 can be pumped underground, either simply to store it away permanently or as a way of extracting more oil from existing wells, using the high-pressure gas to force more of the black gold to the surface.
When hydrogen is burned, it produces no CO2. Eventually hydrogen made this way could be used in vehicles, though in Abu Dhabi it will generate electricity.
"It's important because it shows that you can generate hydrogen without carbon release from fossil fuels," commented Keith Guy, an engineering consultant and professor at the UK's Bath University.
"When you look at how hydrogen could be made economically, the route that many people have been looking at, through electrolysis of water, is incredibly expensive."
The Masdar Sustainable City, another component of the Abu Dhabi government's plans which is being designed with input from the environmental group WWF, is envisaged as a self-contained car-free zone where all energy will come from renewable resources, principally solar panels to generate electricity.
Buildings will be constructed to allow air in but keep the Sun's heat out. Wind towers will ventilate homes and offices using natural convection.
full article
The Gulf state describes the five-year initiative as "the most ambitious sustainability project ever launched by a government".
Components will include the world's largest hydrogen power plant.
The government has also announced plans for a "sustainable city", housing about 50,000 people, that will produce no greenhouse gases and contain no cars.
The $15bn fund, which the state hopes will lead to international joint ventures involving much more money, is being channelled through the Masdar Initiative, a company established to develop and commercialise clean energy technologies.
"As global demand for energy continues to expand, and as climate change becomes a real and growing concern, the time has come to look to the future," said Masdar CEO Dr Sultan Al Jaber.
"Our ability to adapt and respond to these realities will ensure that Abu Dhabi's global energy leadership as well as our own growth and development continues."
Technology bridge
The portfolio of technologies eligible for funding under the Masdar Initiative is extensive, but solar energy is likely to be a major beneficiary.
The hydrogen plant, meanwhile, will link the world's currently dominant technology, fossil fuel burning, with two technologies likely to be important in a low-carbon future - carbon sequestration and hydrogen manufacture.
Hydrogen will be manufactured from natural gas by reactions involving steam, producing a mixture of hydrogen and carbon dioxide.
The CO2 can be pumped underground, either simply to store it away permanently or as a way of extracting more oil from existing wells, using the high-pressure gas to force more of the black gold to the surface.
When hydrogen is burned, it produces no CO2. Eventually hydrogen made this way could be used in vehicles, though in Abu Dhabi it will generate electricity.
"It's important because it shows that you can generate hydrogen without carbon release from fossil fuels," commented Keith Guy, an engineering consultant and professor at the UK's Bath University.
"When you look at how hydrogen could be made economically, the route that many people have been looking at, through electrolysis of water, is incredibly expensive."
The Masdar Sustainable City, another component of the Abu Dhabi government's plans which is being designed with input from the environmental group WWF, is envisaged as a self-contained car-free zone where all energy will come from renewable resources, principally solar panels to generate electricity.
Buildings will be constructed to allow air in but keep the Sun's heat out. Wind towers will ventilate homes and offices using natural convection.
full article
Saturday, 19 January 2008
Sun setting on solar power?
There are fewer solar panels in the UK than anywhere else in Europe - and no one's blaming the weather. Sarah Lonsdale spotlights a national disgrace
David Street's house in Nightingale Road, Stoke Newington, is the kind of new home all builders should be constructing.
That is if we are to stand any chance of meeting the Government's target to reduce carbon emissions from housing by 60 per cent by 2050. And Friends of the Earth say that is too low - it should be 80 per cent.
Unlike its wasteful Victorian neighbours, Mr Street's home consumes approximately two thirds less energy than a conventional house, has super-insulation, carbon- neutral windows, is built from recycled materials and most of its roof is covered in electricity-generating (PV) solar panels.
The house is not completely carbon-neutral, however, owing to the Government's mismanagement of the renewable energy grants system. The whole of the recycled rubber roof should have been solar-panelled but the owner-builder, college lecturer David Street, could not afford that.
This is because the Government's grants procedure for installing wind and solar energy systems in houses, under its Low Carbon Buildings Programme, is so complicated and inadequate that few homeowners feel the expense is worthwhile.
Despite Gordon Brown's positive talk about reducing carbon emissions, the UK's production of solar electricity remains extremely low - about 3 per cent of our electricity comes from the sun, compared to up to 20 per cent in other European countries.
Figures for per capita production of solar electricity show that the UK is 15th in Europe, behind Spain, Greece and Italy. These countries have more sun but, to our shame, we lag behind Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Holland.
"I missed out on £5,000 of grants because as I was building the house, the Government was in the process of changing the grants system," says Street.
By the time he managed to obtain his grant, it had become a flat rate of £2,500 per household, and as a result he had to cut back on the number of panels he installed.
"The Government is boasting about being green but is doing very little to help homeowners reduce their reliance on fossil fuel." Research by Labour MP Lynne Jones reveals that until March 21, 2007, 3,988 households had been awarded grants under the Low Carbon Buildings Scheme.
But in the six months from March to September, only 113 households had applied, because of the £2,500 cap. "Applicants are abandoning the scheme," says Dr Jones.
In a recent report, Dr Brenda Boardman, of the University of Oxford's Environmental Change Institute, blamed the "abysmally slow" rate of installations not only on the grants system, but on the amount paid to home generators who sell "green" electricity back to the National Grid.
In Germany and Spain, whose governments are actively encouraging micro- production of solar electricity, homeowners are paid about 30p per kWh (kilowatt hour) for electricity they sell back to the grid. In the UK, there is no national policy and the amount homeowners are offered for their clean, green electricity varies from a low of nothing to a high of 18p per kWh, paid by Scottish and Southern Energy.
Unsurprisingly, because the system costs more to install, and the payback time is more than three times as long than in other countries, UK homeowners are giving it a wide berth.
Since the government reduction, says Dave Timms of Friends of the Earth, the uptake of grants has "fallen off a cliff".
"It must be some kind of record that a grants system aimed at supporting a fledgling renewable energy industry has actually resulted in the shedding of jobs," he says.
"In Germany, the industry employs more than a quarter of a million people."
The Government's Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform counters: "By introducing a maximum grant level, we can use the funds to support an increased number of installations. We believe the £2,500 cap will still make a useful contribution to PV installations going forward."
Launching the Conservatives' Green Paper Power to the People last month, David Cameron said: "Once people start generating their own electricity they will become far more conscious of the way in which they use it. A new system of tariffs, by which people are paid for the energy they produce, will stimulate diversity of power supply."
Juliet Davenport, chief executive of Good Energy, says: "All governments need to do is put their support in the right place and stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution."
full article
David Street's house in Nightingale Road, Stoke Newington, is the kind of new home all builders should be constructing.
That is if we are to stand any chance of meeting the Government's target to reduce carbon emissions from housing by 60 per cent by 2050. And Friends of the Earth say that is too low - it should be 80 per cent.
Unlike its wasteful Victorian neighbours, Mr Street's home consumes approximately two thirds less energy than a conventional house, has super-insulation, carbon- neutral windows, is built from recycled materials and most of its roof is covered in electricity-generating (PV) solar panels.
The house is not completely carbon-neutral, however, owing to the Government's mismanagement of the renewable energy grants system. The whole of the recycled rubber roof should have been solar-panelled but the owner-builder, college lecturer David Street, could not afford that.
This is because the Government's grants procedure for installing wind and solar energy systems in houses, under its Low Carbon Buildings Programme, is so complicated and inadequate that few homeowners feel the expense is worthwhile.
Despite Gordon Brown's positive talk about reducing carbon emissions, the UK's production of solar electricity remains extremely low - about 3 per cent of our electricity comes from the sun, compared to up to 20 per cent in other European countries.
Figures for per capita production of solar electricity show that the UK is 15th in Europe, behind Spain, Greece and Italy. These countries have more sun but, to our shame, we lag behind Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Holland.
"I missed out on £5,000 of grants because as I was building the house, the Government was in the process of changing the grants system," says Street.
By the time he managed to obtain his grant, it had become a flat rate of £2,500 per household, and as a result he had to cut back on the number of panels he installed.
"The Government is boasting about being green but is doing very little to help homeowners reduce their reliance on fossil fuel." Research by Labour MP Lynne Jones reveals that until March 21, 2007, 3,988 households had been awarded grants under the Low Carbon Buildings Scheme.
But in the six months from March to September, only 113 households had applied, because of the £2,500 cap. "Applicants are abandoning the scheme," says Dr Jones.
In a recent report, Dr Brenda Boardman, of the University of Oxford's Environmental Change Institute, blamed the "abysmally slow" rate of installations not only on the grants system, but on the amount paid to home generators who sell "green" electricity back to the National Grid.
In Germany and Spain, whose governments are actively encouraging micro- production of solar electricity, homeowners are paid about 30p per kWh (kilowatt hour) for electricity they sell back to the grid. In the UK, there is no national policy and the amount homeowners are offered for their clean, green electricity varies from a low of nothing to a high of 18p per kWh, paid by Scottish and Southern Energy.
Unsurprisingly, because the system costs more to install, and the payback time is more than three times as long than in other countries, UK homeowners are giving it a wide berth.
Since the government reduction, says Dave Timms of Friends of the Earth, the uptake of grants has "fallen off a cliff".
"It must be some kind of record that a grants system aimed at supporting a fledgling renewable energy industry has actually resulted in the shedding of jobs," he says.
"In Germany, the industry employs more than a quarter of a million people."
The Government's Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform counters: "By introducing a maximum grant level, we can use the funds to support an increased number of installations. We believe the £2,500 cap will still make a useful contribution to PV installations going forward."
Launching the Conservatives' Green Paper Power to the People last month, David Cameron said: "Once people start generating their own electricity they will become far more conscious of the way in which they use it. A new system of tariffs, by which people are paid for the energy they produce, will stimulate diversity of power supply."
Juliet Davenport, chief executive of Good Energy, says: "All governments need to do is put their support in the right place and stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution."
full article
Inquiry demand after third energy price rise
British Gas said yesterday it was raising gas and electricity prices by 15% with immediate effect, meaning most of its 16 million customers will pay around £130 more over the coming year. The inflation-busting rise is expected to take customers' total spending on heating and lighting to more than £1,050 for the year - and add £1bn to British Gas coffers this year.
The government was coming under renewed pressure last night to launch an investigation into the home energy market after Britain's biggest supplier became the third power firm to raise prices substantially. The move, which was blamed on higher wholesale costs, prompted consumer groups to demand a Competition Commission investigation into whether the big six power firms that dominate the market were acting in "tacit collusion".
They say in other European countries recent price rises have been substantially less than the 15%-plus increases heaped on UK consumers - evidence that the UK market is not working. In Germany some bills have been falling, while in France gas prices have risen by 4%.
British Gas said yesterday it had been forced to put its prices up due to a 51% increase in wholesale gas prices, and to pay for new environmental charges. Much of Britain's gas is sourced from the North sea, Norway and continental Europe.
On Tuesday rival EDF claimed wholesale gas prices had risen by 117% when it raised its gas prices by almost 13%. Two weeks ago npower argued they had risen by 66% as it put 19% on gas prices.
The industry regulator, Ofgem, this week contradicted all three claims, saying one-year forward wholesale gas prices had in fact risen by 31% over the same period. The correct figure for electricity was 40%, it said. In the last three weeks oil and wholesale gas prices have been falling.
"I'm sick and tired of hearing energy companies try to justify the latest bout of pain they are inflicting on their customers," said Allan Asher, chief executive of consumer body Energywatch. "This increase piles on even more agony for consumers - particularly those on lower incomes. It is obvious to anyone who looks at it, this market is not delivering good value to consumers. The reasons are well known and explain why Energywatch has been calling on the government to call in the Competition Commission. The commission is a fantastic resource to be used in precisely these issues of market structure. It is a mystery to me why neither Ofgem nor the government want to use it."
Miles Brignall
full article
The government was coming under renewed pressure last night to launch an investigation into the home energy market after Britain's biggest supplier became the third power firm to raise prices substantially. The move, which was blamed on higher wholesale costs, prompted consumer groups to demand a Competition Commission investigation into whether the big six power firms that dominate the market were acting in "tacit collusion".
They say in other European countries recent price rises have been substantially less than the 15%-plus increases heaped on UK consumers - evidence that the UK market is not working. In Germany some bills have been falling, while in France gas prices have risen by 4%.
British Gas said yesterday it had been forced to put its prices up due to a 51% increase in wholesale gas prices, and to pay for new environmental charges. Much of Britain's gas is sourced from the North sea, Norway and continental Europe.
On Tuesday rival EDF claimed wholesale gas prices had risen by 117% when it raised its gas prices by almost 13%. Two weeks ago npower argued they had risen by 66% as it put 19% on gas prices.
The industry regulator, Ofgem, this week contradicted all three claims, saying one-year forward wholesale gas prices had in fact risen by 31% over the same period. The correct figure for electricity was 40%, it said. In the last three weeks oil and wholesale gas prices have been falling.
"I'm sick and tired of hearing energy companies try to justify the latest bout of pain they are inflicting on their customers," said Allan Asher, chief executive of consumer body Energywatch. "This increase piles on even more agony for consumers - particularly those on lower incomes. It is obvious to anyone who looks at it, this market is not delivering good value to consumers. The reasons are well known and explain why Energywatch has been calling on the government to call in the Competition Commission. The commission is a fantastic resource to be used in precisely these issues of market structure. It is a mystery to me why neither Ofgem nor the government want to use it."
Miles Brignall
full article
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
