A kick up the renewable energy targets

Posted by jamie - 23 January 2008 at 8:31am - Comments

An offshore wind farm

As much as any announcement from the EU can generate enormous anticipation, the proposed renewable energy targets for member states has been eagerly awaited by our climate change team. It's been pretty much public knowledge for some time what the target for the UK is expected to be but never the less, being told to produce 15 per cent of our energy from renewable sources by 2020 will necessarily kick-start a clean energy revolution - currently our renewable energy total is less than 3 per cent, just behind Malta in the EU league table.

The targets are being proposed for each country using a formula based on a number of factors such as current renewable energy capacity and gross domestic product, and while 15 per cent might not sound like a great deal, remember we're talking about total energy, not just electricity.

Total energy includes heating and transport and, because the potential for introducing renewable sources into these sectors is much more limited, the bulk of our share will come from generating electricity. That means that in 12 years time, the UK will have to produce 40 per cent of its juice from wind, wave, tidal and the rest.

This will be a massive challenge - even though we have the greatest potential for renewable energy in Europe, we generate less than 5 per cent of our electricity from renewables - but it can be done. Last month, business secretary John Hutton said he wanted to put policies in place to encourage the development of 25 gigawatts from offshore wind by 2020. There's 8GW already planned plus a further 8GW from onshore wind stuck in planning hell, so that's 41GW in total. If all of that comes into play, 30 per cent of our electricity would come just from wind power.

And then there's wave and tidal power. Figures produced by the government indicate that 12-13 per cent of our electricity could be produced from marine sources (as estimated in a 2006 report by the Carbon Trust and in the 2003 energy white paper - pdf). Add that to the wind figures and we're already well over 50 per cent by the magic 2020 date, even without other sources such as biomass, solar and geothermal. So the EU's target is not the quantum leap it might appear, and we have to exceed it to bring greenhouse gas emissions down even further.

What about the expected 'energy gap'? There's a panic in some circles caused by the inevitable closure of antiquated fossil fuel stations that don't meet modern air pollution standards and nuclear power stations at the end of their working life; this gap is expected to represent around 30 per cent of our total electricity supply, so the 40 per cent target will leave us with change to spare. We won't need those new coal-fired power stations then.

Neither will we need the nuclear power stations the government is so keen to build. The first of these won't be ready until 2021 at the earliest, so if that 40 per cent target is reached by 2020... well, you can do the maths. Don't worry unduly about rising fuel bills, either. The recent upward trend has been mainly caused by rocketing wholesale prices for gas and oil, whereas a greater abundance of renewable energy installations will protect us from the vagaries of the global energy markets.

Despite attempts to scupper the deal (as revealed in leaked government documents), Gordon Brown has since reaffirmed his commitment to the EU targets, however there is the danger that the government could try to buy its way out of any shortfalls. By trading with other countries to take advantage of their excess renewable capacity, there's the chance that the 40 per cent target could severely undermined. But the embarrassment at not being able to make the target, not to mention the further damage to any pretence at global leadership on climate change, will hopefully make Brown and any successors think twice before making any attempt to cook the books.

Even when the proposals are announced later today, they won't be set in stone as yet. The proposals - which also include reforms to the EU emissions trading scheme and standards for carbon capture and storage (CCS) plants - need to be formally adopted before they go to the European parliament to be debated and amended. We can expect an agreement anytime between the end of this year and next, but that's no reason to wait until then before putting clean energy policies in place.

The “energy gap” is being resolved, but not by wind power. Following several consents made in the last six months, new gas power stations could easily result in an increase in available thermal generation resources of 5% by 2014. Over the following ten years it is likely many of the remaining coal stations will close, so there is potentially an “energy gap”, but we have over six years before it starts to open up. How big could it become? There will still be something like 20000MW of coal plant left in 2015, most of which was built in the early 70s. On top of that, some of the earlier gas stations are looking a little inefficient and long in the tooth….

Can wind fill the gap? Only if one could dictate when the wind blows. My understanding of the statistics is that if 7 units of wind power were to replace 1 unit of controllable generation, there would only be a failure to supply for 8 hours of peak demand per year. So the 25MW of offshore wind farms announced last month would be almost enough to replace Drax power station, provided there was some kind of demand side response to cover the periods of shortfall.

Wave power is likely to have a similar availability to wind. Tidal power is predictable, but until electrical energy storage is cheaper than new gas power stations, it is unlikely to result in a significant fall in the need for controllable generation.

So one can expect a continuing need for new controllable power plants beyond the current crop of gas plants. If the proposed coal and nuclear stations don’t go ahead, we will be heavily dependant on gas, which I’m sure would please Gazprom.

So why are the wind farms being built? They are being subsidised purely to reduce the need to burn fossil fuels, and thus cut emissions. They have negligible impact on the need for controllable generation sources.

Hoorah some good news, seems like government are finally making progress on renewable energy, quite alot will probably end up being developed here in cornwall, hopefully the council approve.

And yes I know this isn't a compltely controlable form of electricity generation but the new turbines are very good, also what about biomass (that's controllable), solar, tidal (predictable) and hydroelectric which can provide a base load and potential for storing energy as gravitational potential energy by using excess power i.e. when it's blowy and sunny to pump water uphill. Also energy efficiency measures can cut our electricity requirement in quite a major way. We just gotta convince people to switch off lightbulbs and standbys etc and w'll save loads aswell as decentralising the energy grid which is in effect what increasing renewable capacity will do.

JetG. rescue diver extraordinaire.

There’s a link to a German study somewhere on the Greenpeace site that gives a fuel mix with no fossil fuels. Other than the fact that they were using five times as much generating capacity as the average load (they forgot to give any details of peak demand), the other interesting fact was a requirement for 17% of their agricultural land mass to be covered by biofuel crops in order to meet the demand when there was no solar or wind power available (they also relied on a considerably higher percentage of hydro-storage and interconnection than is currently available in the UK).

A lack of new hydro development in the UK is because there are few suitable sites that are not already exploited. Those that already exist, have a relatively low utilisation so would only used at peak times. This implies they have a large generating capacity with respect to rainfall (another thing that cannot be guaranteed). As mentioned before, tidal could be dependable given cheap enough storage.

But how effective will efficiency measures be? I would suspect increased demand for transport and the economic growth of the country will mean the demand for electricity will continue to grow. The only case where I see a reduction in demand is if the country goes into recession, in which case would the energy efficiency be a priority?

In the battle of global ideologies the ultimate winners will be those who can demonstrate the most attractive way of life. Most attractive to the largest majority. Sikh Hindu Christian Moslem Jew. Asian European African American. A vegan environmentally friendly multi cultural bio sustainable system where money is not an issue developed around the principle of nationalised catering and transport with a primary aim of watching the sun rise.

my vertical axis turbine is built and working. It needs to be scaled up to make a power source but it is simpler then the others and has low construction and maintenance costs.

see the video at:

http://www.chrisscrazyideas.co.uk/Practical%20
Suggestions/Vertical%20Wind%20Turbine/index.htm

It takes four upright blades and two crossed peices as the turntable, simple to make. Needs an alternator to make in a power source, I suggest a car alternator. It rotates quite slowly so needs a differently designed alternator for low speeds. It can have four, six or eight blades. We could each make one for our back gardens.
Then sell them to our neighbours.
Christopher Strevens
http://www.myphilosophy.eu/

The “energy gap” is being resolved, but not by wind power. Following several consents made in the last six months, new gas power stations could easily result in an increase in available thermal generation resources of 5% by 2014. Over the following ten years it is likely many of the remaining coal stations will close, so there is potentially an “energy gap”, but we have over six years before it starts to open up. How big could it become? There will still be something like 20000MW of coal plant left in 2015, most of which was built in the early 70s. On top of that, some of the earlier gas stations are looking a little inefficient and long in the tooth…. Can wind fill the gap? Only if one could dictate when the wind blows. My understanding of the statistics is that if 7 units of wind power were to replace 1 unit of controllable generation, there would only be a failure to supply for 8 hours of peak demand per year. So the 25MW of offshore wind farms announced last month would be almost enough to replace Drax power station, provided there was some kind of demand side response to cover the periods of shortfall. Wave power is likely to have a similar availability to wind. Tidal power is predictable, but until electrical energy storage is cheaper than new gas power stations, it is unlikely to result in a significant fall in the need for controllable generation. So one can expect a continuing need for new controllable power plants beyond the current crop of gas plants. If the proposed coal and nuclear stations don’t go ahead, we will be heavily dependant on gas, which I’m sure would please Gazprom. So why are the wind farms being built? They are being subsidised purely to reduce the need to burn fossil fuels, and thus cut emissions. They have negligible impact on the need for controllable generation sources.

Hoorah some good news, seems like government are finally making progress on renewable energy, quite alot will probably end up being developed here in cornwall, hopefully the council approve. And yes I know this isn't a compltely controlable form of electricity generation but the new turbines are very good, also what about biomass (that's controllable), solar, tidal (predictable) and hydroelectric which can provide a base load and potential for storing energy as gravitational potential energy by using excess power i.e. when it's blowy and sunny to pump water uphill. Also energy efficiency measures can cut our electricity requirement in quite a major way. We just gotta convince people to switch off lightbulbs and standbys etc and w'll save loads aswell as decentralising the energy grid which is in effect what increasing renewable capacity will do. JetG. rescue diver extraordinaire.

There’s a link to a German study somewhere on the Greenpeace site that gives a fuel mix with no fossil fuels. Other than the fact that they were using five times as much generating capacity as the average load (they forgot to give any details of peak demand), the other interesting fact was a requirement for 17% of their agricultural land mass to be covered by biofuel crops in order to meet the demand when there was no solar or wind power available (they also relied on a considerably higher percentage of hydro-storage and interconnection than is currently available in the UK). A lack of new hydro development in the UK is because there are few suitable sites that are not already exploited. Those that already exist, have a relatively low utilisation so would only used at peak times. This implies they have a large generating capacity with respect to rainfall (another thing that cannot be guaranteed). As mentioned before, tidal could be dependable given cheap enough storage. But how effective will efficiency measures be? I would suspect increased demand for transport and the economic growth of the country will mean the demand for electricity will continue to grow. The only case where I see a reduction in demand is if the country goes into recession, in which case would the energy efficiency be a priority?

In the battle of global ideologies the ultimate winners will be those who can demonstrate the most attractive way of life. Most attractive to the largest majority. Sikh Hindu Christian Moslem Jew. Asian European African American. A vegan environmentally friendly multi cultural bio sustainable system where money is not an issue developed around the principle of nationalised catering and transport with a primary aim of watching the sun rise.

my vertical axis turbine is built and working. It needs to be scaled up to make a power source but it is simpler then the others and has low construction and maintenance costs. see the video at: http://www.chrisscrazyideas.co.uk/Practical%20 Suggestions/Vertical%20Wind%20Turbine/index.htm It takes four upright blades and two crossed peices as the turntable, simple to make. Needs an alternator to make in a power source, I suggest a car alternator. It rotates quite slowly so needs a differently designed alternator for low speeds. It can have four, six or eight blades. We could each make one for our back gardens. Then sell them to our neighbours. Christopher Strevens http://www.myphilosophy.eu/

Follow Greenpeace UK