decentralised energy

Mega-inefficiency: Only 38 per cent of the coal burned at Drax actually generates power

Energy efficiency. What does that phrase make you think of? Here are a few free-association words I pulled out of my head: insulation, draught proofing, grey, tax return, boring, Germany. Yes, sometimes I do find it hard to get excited about using energy more smartly. But that's only because I'm an idiot.

Avedore CHP plant in Denmark

Remember how we said last month that industrial combined heat and power (CHP) plants could save us money, increase our energy security and help slow climate change?

Well, we've just heard that plans are afoot for just such a plant in Scotland. The Tullis Russell paper mill plans to reduce its annual carbon emissions by around 250,000 tonnes a year by switching to biomass CHP for its electricity and steam.

No one will be surprised that Greenpeace is against the construction of new nuclear power stations, but what some may find unusual is one of the solutions we are proposing to meet our energy needs and reduce our CO2 emissions - industrial CHP, or combined heat and power.

"You have to act quickly, because very soon these fields will be dry." This prediction, drawled by hardened oilman Daniel Plainview in this year's best film, There Will Be Blood, has become a reality. Eight years into the 21st century and we are seeing the beginnings of a new energy horizon. Oil is receding into the distance. Nature's "free gift" to humanity is running out, fast.

2008 will come to be seen as the year the world's leaders were forced to confront their demons. The global response to stratospheric oil prices will determine if we are able to escape the worst consequences of climate change, feed the world and prevent pollution from ruining living conditions in our ever expanding cities. Trillions of dollars will be spent in the next few decades on technologies to generate energy, as old infrastructure rusts and economies expand in parts of the world that have endured poverty for centuries.

Alex Steffen of Worldchanging recently wrote an excellent piece called Who Will Tell the People? And How? about the yawning chasm between the reality of climate change and the failure of government to bring in the massive changes needed. Talking about US emissions cuts, he writes:

We're running into a situation here where the acceptable political action is to move from A to C, but where realism demands that - if we want to dodge a catastrophic collision with ecological reality - we move from A to say Q. And that gap, between C and Q, is large enough to lose a future in.

As you're reading this blog, you probably don't need reminding about the catastrophic collision with ecological reality Steffen mentions. With stakes this high, the changes needed (Steffen's A to Q) are profound, fundamental and cross all facets of human existence - from our energy and transport systems to, dare I say it, our social and economic systems.