A Green Degree Blog: New Angles On Sustainability

November 6th 2012

It’s Time To Hand Over UK Wind Projects To The Community

UK Wind energy has taken what can only be described as a potentially fatal blow in recent weeks, mostly due to our fancy new and obviously yet to adjust himself Energy Minister John Hayes, who slammed the industry in a poorly veiled release of emotion to various newspapers and public arenas.

His view brings to light issues which many of us were deeply worried about when he took position as the senior governmental minister presiding over energy matters, those pertaining to renewable energy and in particular wind farms, both on and offshore. He was well known for his relatively open anti-wind stance years before his new job was offered, but plenty hoped this rather large crease had been ironed out in the process of waking up and smelling the climate coffee. Apparently not.

John Hayes is a believer of many things wholeheartedly and affectionately, including things like gas, nuclear and domestic offshore drilling, but not of a future where the UK is ‘peppered’ with detestable wind farms ruining ‘this green and pleasant land’ to which he has taken it upon himself to be the guardian of. It is pretty certain that the UK will meet and possibly even exceed its wind deployment targets for 2015 and 2020, and we could undoubtedly carry on far beyond these ageing goals and continue to lead Europe in the generation of purely wind powered electricity, but Hayes doesn’t want that. His view: ‘enough is enough’ on the wind front; we’re going to reach our goals and therefore we should stop blighting the landscape with the bloody things. Because that will solve climate change won’t it John.

Aside from his complete ignorance and obvious political gaming on this subject, in the face of a shambolic energy policy, Hayes did raise one important point, albeit a painful one [for me at least] to come to terms with. If wind is to be deployed on any greater scale then it currently is, investigation and surveying into the impacts on communities must be taken more seriously than it is now for them to come to accept turbines in their backyard.

I personally feel that he said this to simply placate the environmentalists and wind industries out there who may be more angered than most if he had just outright stated his genuine dislike for the technology, but it can be read in another, more rational way.

We are a nation of ‘NIMBY’; we hate to have what is left of our humble British landscape marred by a dirty great wind turbine in our ‘backyard’ or a farm miles offshore polluting our view of the abundant shipping lanes, and this is precisely the reason why the industry hasn’t exploded like it should have done years ago. The UK is a windy place, and a consistently windy place at that, and a lot of the regions where the gusts hit the highest speeds, very little tends to exist, even if that may be due to constraints with the topography; think Scottish highlands and you’ll get this gist.

October 20th 2012

The Latest Terror Threat? The ‘Environmental Taliban’…What, What?

|#

Oh George, we marvel at how you consistently manage to spout something new and controversial, almost on a daily basis. You really are a character I don’t think people will be forgetting for some time to come, be that for better (unlikely) or for worse. So what has he done now? That’s if you haven’t already stumbled across the latest gobsmackingly stupid comment from the man who has simultaneously managed to upset both the wider public, most of the UK government including his own Party (22% of Tory’s voted for him out in a recent poll), the EU and most of the powerful energy industry players out there, and all roughly within a week or two. Amazing.

Mr. Osborne has now begun referring to those within Parliament who are campaigning for greener futures and a strong climate agenda as the ‘environmental Taliban’, in a stunningly short-sighted comment no doubt directed at Ed Davey and his keen followers, who in most cases are the majority of the public who know a thing or two about clean energy. It would seem that environmentalists have now moved on from being a Satanic cult (no joke, this was a real thing said by a real US political speaker) worshipping the devil that is the Earth/Gaia, and are now a group of radicals akin to dangerous terrorists. And he’s Chancellor of the Exchequer? Satan save us.

This name-calling comes at a very sensitive period for the entirety of UK energy policy, which is, for lack of a better phrase, a complete shambles, primarily driven by Osborne and his cohort of Tory followers who variously are either anti-wind, solar or renewables, and pro-offshore and fracking. Even if he meant the ‘Taliban’ reference as a joke, there will undoubtedly be people out there who do not take it so, and by extending his terminology to environmentalists as a whole, he’s including a huge number of people who believe climate change is real, we are responsible for the majority and that low-carbon is the only real solution. Hence why protests and Twitter campaigns such as #greenisworking have exploded in favour of condemning his actions (I’ve even seen one called #killgeorgeosborne, which is a likelihood seeming ever more likely…).

According to reports, the comment came as Ed Davey desperately attempts to push through a binding emissions cap on power plants for 2030, as well as clarifying legislation on the approaching switch to ‘contracts for difference’, a policy which aims to lock in value for renewable projects and promote low-carbon development, with the Treasury fronting the responsibility of guaranteeing support. Of course, Osborne doesn’t like this idea, and is rapidly becoming an aura of clean-tech skepticism and a loss of interest in decarbonising the grid, and as many fear, a reflection of the general Tory party backbench’s opinion.

Instead, Osborne has long rallied for a ‘dash for gas’, whereby abundances in domestic natural shale gas could be exploited to lower energy costs and secure resources for the future, a notion no doubt triggered by the explosion in gas extraction and a tumbling in energy costs over in America. While the idea of energy security and low costs are his way of appealing to a nation where 9% gas bill hikes are almost common place and keeping the house lit is becoming increasingly painful on the wallet, there are some rather major flaws in his plan.

Posted at 9:21am and tagged with: george osborne, Environment, taliban, energy, debate, policy, politics, ed davey, UK, parliament, Cameron, big six, coal, gas, fracking, oil, wind, solar, tidal, money, terror, green, jobs, PTC, US, Tory, climate, clean, low-carbon, Earth,.

June 9th 2012

Sustainable Use Of Arctic Fossil Fuels & Getting Norway On Our Side

|#

A recent deal was struck between the UK and Norway detailing the future plans for energy supply and security in both nations, a smart move considering that Norway supplies over a quarter of our entire energy needs, yes, our entire needs, and keeping them on our good side will suit us well come the inevitable throttling back on fossil fuel supply.

However, veiled beneath this seemingly uncharacteristically farsighted decision is a deceptively evil motive. At the very heart of the entire agreement lies a single key set of words; ‘sustainable use of the Arctic and it’s energy resources’. Now, to anybody who knows just an atom of stuff on the Arctic, its energy resources, and its current state in the global climate, you will instantly take umbrage and offence to this claim.

This, to me at least, is the crux of it. The Arctic is melting at a faster rate than nature has experienced for hundreds of thousands of years, with plenty of evidence for these rates increasing, and with this melt comes some interesting things. As land previously covered in ice is revealed and permafrost, bogs and peatland warm up, the number of oil, coal and gas reserves generated by millennia of pressure, will skyrocket.

So, when someone says they’re motive is to ‘sustainably utilise’ these fossil fuel resources, of which are no doubt being revealed at an accelerated rate due to burning of the very same things, alarm bells instantly begin ringing in my head. Sustainable, fossil fuels, and a melting Arctic just shouldn’t be in the same sentence, let alone the same room.

This agreement is also seen by many as opening the door to multiple large and powerful fossil fuel companies and drilling conglomerates to milk the UK and it’s money to finance their moves into this warming gold mine, or should that be oil mine (?), until every last drop is drunk and the climate soars over 2-3˚C. Why this may seem slightly premature, theres plenty of evidence to suggest that Norwegian fuel giants will have no qualms in pushing us Brits and Cameron around when it comes to crunch time.

Statoil, a Norwegian behemoth of fossil fuel supply has known to have threatened the UK in the past, warning that there ‘are other place we can sell our gas to aside from the UK’. What’s worrying is that Norway has this very power in its hands if wishes to wield it in the future, as not only are the Northern European nations of Scandinavia and further doing very well economically, politically and socially, but providing over 1/4 of our energy gives them one hell of a noose to tighten.

Posted at 10:13am and tagged with: arctic, oil, gas, coal, fossil fuel, melting, climate, warming, science, UK, NOrway, Russia, pipeline, sustainable, carbon, emissions, politics, Cameron, mine, energy, security, money, renewables,.

May 27th 2012

UK Energy Policy Takes Yet Another Muddled Route - Solar Cut By 50%

|#

UK energy policy is sure one confusing and constantly changing subject, with many recent news stories no deviation from this pattern. Us English and our government just love mixing and muddling our energy futures as much as we cash, sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse, and sometimes it seems like it’s just for the kicks.

A little over half a year ago, I went to an open day for a course in environmental technology, energy and renewables at Imperial College London, and there I was given a brief talk regarding one of the key course options, aptly named ‘Energy Policy’. This was all very interesting and the main reason I intend to do a master there, but there was one particular comment which stuck with me, made by the course convenor.

He stated halfway through his introduction that, as a whole, “the UK government has tried every single energy policy ever thought of, and failed at most of them”. I feel this comment is pretty appropriate given the latest news on that very subject, of which I’ll brush over below.

Of late, the UK government and David Cameron have come to the decision to cut the solar feed-in-tariffs (FiTs) which are music to every solar-owner ears, which effectively pay the user for producing clean solar energy and feeding it back into the grid. This once sat at 21p per KWh, but is set to drop to 16p by August 1st, with similar drops on a 3 monthly basis, until the price is either frozen or adjusted once more.

This idea has provoked a stern response from many consumers of solar energy, who feel that these uncertain prices and abrupt slashes will deeply hurt the UK solar industry, which as we all know, is absolutely booming, both here and globally, and would be detrimental to everyone. However, these cuts must be made if the government is to be financially able to continue providing such FiTs, although many could argue their seemingly pointless endeavours into fossil fuel and nuclear could easily be rerouted to this sector.

On the other hand, this new FiT is still highly competitive in the global market, and as we’ve seen in Germany, has continued to drive strong growth in solar sales and installations, and so we shouldn’t be too hasty to condemn it.

April 12th 2012

UK Gets More Nuclear Waste To Rid In Return For Japanese Smarts

2 notes |#

The UK government has, as of Tuesday, signed a deal with Japan to lease its expertise in nuclear decommissioning and waste clean-up, in return for knowledge from some of the world’s greatest builders of nuclear reactors.

The United Kingdom has always been good at what is in all fairness, a very dirty and taboo industry, that of managing nuclear waste and disposing of it as safely and environmentally friendly as possible, with 19 sites currently active in the sector. It’s an odd expertise to have given the relatively small presence of nuclear in the country, but it’s nonetheless a lucrative and much-needed business to be in, with over 10,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste produced annually.

Albeit, it was until the recent spate of nuclear fear and money issues caused the closing of hundreds of plants worldwide and the pulling out of major builds, including in the UK itself, as governments rethought their stance on the splitting of atoms. I mentioned very briefly in a post earlier in this blog’s lifetime that the shying away of the world from nuclear would likely harm our prospects as the ‘glowing-green’ waste cleaners of the globe, and could lose us a lot of money.

Whether this was the case I am unsure, but this new agreement may come at a time when money and foreign expertise is in high demand. The deal will allow the Japanese to offload much of the waste and ready-to-be decommissioned plants it has left over from the closure of all 54 of its sites (last to shut this May) following Fukushima to the UK, which will stick it somewhere in the ground and aid in controlling the resultant radioactivity.

In return, we get the technical expertise and knowledge of the Japanese nuclear industry, who will help build newer, cleaner, more efficient reactors in both nations, with a multi-billion pound price-tag at stake. Considering the Japanese have some of the most advanced reactor designs (that’s not including the 1960s Fukushima-Daiichi plant) and the fact that a large gap in energy production must be filled now that RWE and e.on have bailed from their UK build, it seems like a deal laden with positives.

Posted at 7:19pm and tagged with: nuclear waste, nuclear, radioactive, Japan, UK, Cameron, economy, reactor, energy, decommission, solar, wind, Fukushima,.