Wind turbines DO reduce CO2 - FACT!
But of course, we wouldn't expect you to take our word for it.... Read the excellent report in the Guardian.
The assertion that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions is a myth, according to conclusive statistical data obtained from National Grid and analysed here in the Guardian for the first time. With a new wind generation record of 4,131 megawatts set on 14 September, the question of how far the UK's wind generation fleet can help in meeting our climate targets is increasingly controversial. Now it can be shown that the sceptics who lobby against wind simply have their facts wrong.
Has Saudi oil peaked?
The likes of ASPO and Matt Simmons have been warning that Saudi cannot be depended on to meet the shortfall in world oil demands for much longer. Now a front page article in The Telegraph quotes the latest analysis by industry experts that predict Saudi will cease to export oil by 2030.
Until now Saudi has constantly increased production as other major wells in other oil producing states have matured and then peaked. In recent years much of the extra oil was not the sweat light crude that everyone wants... but heavier low grade oil that requires more costly refinement. Clearly the signs have been there for all to see.
No wonder then that recent announcements from the Kingdom regarding massive rollouts of solar PV and even nuclear power plant.
As Matt Simmons says... when Saudi oil production peaks, the worldwide production of oil will have peaked. Expect $500/barrel oil anytime soon.
Independent think tank says wind is good
This week independent think tank IPPR (Institute for Public Policy Research) have published a new peer reviewed guide to wind power concluding that, guess what...
"unequivocally that wind power can significantly reduce carbon emissions, is reliable, poses no threat to energy security, and is technically capable of providing a significant proportion of the UK’s electricity supply with minimal impact on the existing operation of the grid. Claims to the contrary are not supported by the evidence."
The report also publishes many fascinating facts that dispel much of the nimby propaganda pushed out every time a controversial planning application is under consideration. For example, really how much do renewables add to typical household energy bills? According to the report an estimated £30 per year (from 2004 to 2010) - in contrast increases in the cost of wholesale gas added a whopping £290!
Top Government scientist says 2degC limit "out the window"
There are widespread reports today that the UKs most senior scientific advisor to HM Gov, Professor Sir Robert Watson has said limiting global temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius is no longer possible. Instead he predicts rises could be as high as 5 degrees which will have dire consequences for the planet.
"To be quite candid the idea of a 2C target is largely out of the window... I wouldn't rule out a 5 degree world and that would be quite serious for the people of the world especially the poorest. We need more political will than we currently have"
The UK Government, under pressure from back-bench Tories, are currently cutting renewable energy subsidies, by 50% in some cases, and embarking on another "dash for gas".
Winning the battle for the next election clearly trumps fighting the battle to save the planet.
RSPB to install wind turbine at HQ
The RSPB has recently unveiling plans to build a wind turbine at its UK headquarters in Sandy, Bedfordshire.
The RSPB believes that renewable energy is an essential tool in the fight against climate change, which poses the single biggest threat to the long term survival of birds and wildlife.
In addition to campaigning to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the RSPB is committed to reducing its own carbon footprint be generating its energy needs from renewable sources wherever possible.
The proposal will be a significant step for the wildlife charity, which is joining forces with green energy company, Ecotricity.
The RSPB and Ecotricity will shortly be submitting a planning application for a meteorological mast to be erected close to the charity’s head offices at The Lodge nature reserve near Sandy in Bedfordshire. This is the first step in determining if this site is suitable for a wind turbine.
If the site is found to be suitable, the proposed wind turbine will be erected, at the earliest, in autumn 2013 and will measure 100m at its highest point. The RSPB states that t will generate around two thirds of the RSPB’s electricity needs across all of its UK operations.
Martin Harper, RSPB Conservation Director said: “We are keen to promote the use of wind energy where it does not result in unacceptable impacts to wildlife and we are confident that this is a suitable location to do so.
“All of us have a part to play in helping to meet the UK Government’s target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050, and this turbine will be one more step along the way.
“We need a revolution in the way we generate and use energy – but we want that revolution to take place in harmony with the natural environment.
“We know that with the right design and location wind turbines have little or no impact on wildlife. The RSPB has commented on over 1,500 wind farm applications. In the small number of cases – around six per cent – where we feel there is likely to be a significant impact on wildlife we have lodged an objection. In many of these cases the developers have listened and redesigned their plans to make sure they do not threaten wildlife.
“We hope that by siting a wind turbine at our UK headquarters, we will demonstrate to others that with a thorough environmental assessment and the right planning and design, renewable energy and a healthy, thriving environment can go hand in hand.”
Dale Vince, Founder of Ecotricity, said: “Ecotricity’s mission is to change where Britain’s energy comes from because this is our biggest single source of the carbon emissions that cause climate change.
“It’s essential that wind energy projects provide their vital environmental benefits with the minimum environmental impact. To ensure this, we conduct detailed studies on up to 27 different areas of potential impact such as health and safety, cultural heritage and wildlife. Our aim is to ensure that any wind project we build will be a good neighbour, for people and for wildlife, for the entire lifetime of operation.
“So far our studies show the Lodge site is suitable for a wind turbine and would make a significant contribution in reducing the RSPB’s carbon emissions and energy costs.
“Ecotricity is a British company which started 16 years ago as the world’s first green energy company and we don’t pay dividends to shareholders, instead we use our profits to build new sources of green energy.”
Apex MX making the news again..
Today's Droitwich Advertiser reports on calls from the so-called Tibberton Action Group (TAG) to reject the proposals for a medium size wind turbine at the Apex motocross site next to the M5 motorway despite a recommendation to pass by Wychavon planning officers. TAG claim the siting near to the motorway is dangerous even though the Highways Agency have given the project the all clear.
The 91m tall turbine would be 140m from the M5. Of note is the much larger 125m Ecotricity turbine in Reading which is only 150m from the M4. Clearly wind turbines can co-exist with major roads without incident since the severe weather conditions that cause ice to build up on the blades typically only happen one day per year in the UK. Keeping the turbine stopped until the ice has melted mitigates any risk. Still, TAG maintain that there is "a real risk of the turbine causing a major accident with significant loss of life" and that their "engineers" have calculated that huge lumps of ice could be thrown at 200mph to almost a kilometre away. No such evidence has been produced for scrutiny in their submission to the planning authority however.
Recent research papers have concluded the chance of being hit by ice thrown from a wind turbine at 150m is 1 in 1,000,000 which is about the same as the risk of getting struck by lightning. As above fitting ice sensors to detect the formation of ice before it becomes a problem almost completely eliminates any residual risk.
TAG also insinuate that the turbine will not be economically viable, although without the benefit of project capital costs this assertion can only be described as uninformed opinion at best and certainly not a valid planning matter on which the proposals could be refused. TAG point to the rumours that George Osbourne wants to redirect subsidies away from renewables and into nuclear power, however this highlights a misunderstanding of the current schemes since the Feed in Tariff is guaranteed until at least 2030 and at the prevailing rate (index linked) when the turbine becomes operational. Subsidies for future schemes may well drop but this would not affect operational plant. Furthermore, support for nuclear is at an all time low and expected to add £600 annually to the average household energy bill - compared to just £6 annually for wind.
In their most recent letter to the planning authority, TAG claim to have almost 90% support for their objections among villagers. However the Office of National Statistics lists Tibberton as having 482 residents in 194 dwellings. TAG have only 111 signatures on their petition which is less than 25%.
In a Worcester Evening News poll from earlier this year a whopping 67% of WEN readers said they supported wind turbines. In a recent poll for the Independent newspaper 68% of participants said wind power was an acceptable price for green energy with an even higher 79% in the 18-45 age groups.
DistGen MD, John Zamick said "the level of opposition has been somewhat surprising - you'd think that we were proposing a monster wind farm rather than a single medium sized turbine."
Daft energy bill? (UPDATED)
UPDATE (01/06/2012)
George Monbiot is the latest commentator to spell out the inconsistencies in the draft daft energy bill. In his recent Guardian article Monbiot goes as far as to accuse the energy minister, Ed Davey, of deceitfulness. While the bill talks the talk over reducing CO2 emissions by placing caps on the amount of CO2 allowed per unit of electricity and requiring new coal powered plant to use CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) the actual small-print, says Monbiot, has been cleverly worded with get out clauses that will result in business-as-normal.
For example, to gain permission for a new coal fire powered station, the developer merely has to declare that CCS technology "is or is to be, or has been, used in commercial electricity generation for the purposes of or in connection with a CCS demonstration project". Key is the phrase "is to be" - meaning nothing more than an intention.
The bill also allows gas power stations to emit MORE (not less!) CO2 than they do today until the year 2045.
It is worth pointing out that 2050 is the year by which global temperature rises must have been pegged at 2 degrees Celsius if we are to avoid runaway climate change. Only last week the International Energy Agency's chief economist released 2011 data showing a 3.2% rise in CO2 emissions to 31.6 Gigatonnes.
"When I look at this data, the trend is perfectly in line with a temperature increase of 6 degrees Celsius (by 2050), which would have devastating consequences for the planet" Fatih Birol, IEA Chief Economist
UPDATE (23/05/2012)
For a detailed blow-by-blow analysis of the draft Energy Bill read here. Our favourite response has to be from Nick Molho (head of energy policy at WWF) who said:
Given the increasing concerns around the economic viability of new nuclear and the repeated delays to the CCS [carbon capture and storage] demonstration programme, renewable energy and energy efficiency are our best bets to deliver a secure, cost-effective and low-carbon power sector by 2030.
But renewable energy investors need clear, unequivocal, long-term support from ministers, who must face down sniping from the backbenches and certain sections of the media. The government must also recognise that a one-size-fits-all approach just doesn't work in the energy sector and that we need targeted financial support mechanisms for renewables.
Original Post
The Guardian today reports that the anticipated Draft Energy Bill will backtrack on previous Government commitments to be the "greenest ever" and promote new gas and nuclear generation at the expense of renewables.
The new "dash for gas" could all but destroy any hope of meeting CO2 emissions targets but worse still, could totally undermine the fragile solar, wind and tidal industries. Thousands of jobs have already been lost in the solar pv industry following a 50% cut in subsidy earlier this year with another cut planned in the Autumn.
Retaining the dependency on imported foreign gas will saddle future generations with the cost of finding alternative fuel sources and the UK will have failed to take advantage of the "Green Revolution".
New nuclear power stations are likely to add £200 a year to household energy bills according to a report on BBC Radio 4 this morning. This makes the current £5 for renewables look cheap.
If the new energy bill does call for a new dash-for-gas-and-nuclear it will be a sad day indeed for the UK.
Is celebrity opinion worth a jot?
On a recent edition of the BBCs "The One Show" the veteran broadcaster and celebrity Janet Street Porter was given 5 minutes to voice her own very personal hatred for wind energy projects.
Of her three main objections: noise, cost/efficiency and visual impacts she had to concede defeat on all but one.
Visiting a large wind farm in Kent she admitted on camera they weren't actually very noisy at all. Very disappointing!
Next she said they are so costly and inefficient at over £1M each and only generating at a capacity of 25% - 30% and then was immediately shown to be wrong again. No machines are designed to run at 100% for prolonged periods and the "spare" capacity is also a function of life expectancy. The £400M given in subsidy to renewables also pales when compared to the vast amounts given to run the nuclear program and to clean up after it. Reluctantly Ms Porter conceded defeat yet again.
Which left her only one argument - they are ugly. That's a very subjective and personal opinion which she has every right to. There are however plenty who think the exact opposite.
So, how much should we care that "celebrities" use (or abuse) their position within society to push their own personal and sometimes prejudiced views upon the rest of us? In a balanced television debate should 5 whole minutes of prime time be given to such a personalised and non-informed view?
Of course it's ok to criticise renewable energy, but please let's have some well informed balance.
HM Gov burnt £700M loosing solar pv court case
Rumour has is that the total cost for the Governments failed attempt to re-instate the illegal cuts to the Solar PV feed-in-tariff could amount to £700M. The Supreme Court dismissed the Government appeal in March 2012.
Given the 2010/11 budget for the entire FITs scheme was only £867M this appears to be a massively expensive "own goal".
In the meantime many installers are reporting a 95% drop in installations since the start of April.
For a fraction of the £850bn spent on bailing out the banks, free solar panels could have been installed on every suitable household roof in the country. This would have done away with the need for the solar pv feed-in-tariff and created tens of thousands of jobs in the process.
2012 off to a windy start..
According to Renewables UK, 2012 started where 2011 left off - very windy. On December 28th UK wind plant generated 12.2% of UK power, beating the previous record of 10%.
During the period covering December 1st to January 5th approximately 5% of UK generation came from wind.