THE BEACONS GUIDES TO CLIMATE CHANGE
GUIDE THREE UK CLIMATE CHANGE AND ENERGY POLICY
NS
O
C
cha
ura
com
epe
mis
me
xch
rmo
ines
ons
cast
rror
acity explosi ction the charge e n decom climate thermal ion pipel try open ressure d mination dship te ifest
l
a
p
ts
sm
ar
re
tio
sm
ss
us
ta
rrori e kWh/d gy Tesla e genera A nimbyi atts uni transmi ority ind tribution ture con eating h urement ries
h
s
h
P
g
o
te
as
ul
yl
ow
is
ifest technol NG leaka fumes H watts kil coalmine ining aut eated d ity agric onnector and me xide bat em
s
h
L
m
st
em
rc
al
ie
od
re
dio
uir
ga
atter echnique al exhau watts gi ion annu enerate tankers le comm tion inte tprints d carbon fety req ces
g
c
s
t
o
a
t
g
s
t
an
in
fo
ed
po
nt
bu
tra
uab
ega
emen oxins dis watts m rs distri allon bur ic insulat arce val ation ex s carbon al squish platform est subst ion e
i
e
i
c
t
i
r
t
t
r
r
r
g
ces d lectricity oling tow aste bbl tmosphe ethane s policy va mitmen CCS bu a disaste pact pro s produc onv
d
e
m
a
o
h
m
m
m
e
i
o
s
i
w
c
n
s
r
d
c
ec
e
lp
uctio convert thermal ure liqui eenhous icient ca ultiply compres llution A consume itments A nferenc lar g
m
r
o
ff
o
co
eo
n
at
n
ce
m
eren o solar g temper quakes g hicles su roportion GHG clea ructive p ntributio O2 com e goods s hydro s ole
p
co
le
dr
ve
e
sC
led
co
rth
tag
est
es hy hane coo ction ea cy hydro ed nimby wave tid try BP d itioning on usage n percen renewab methane trac
a
s
s
ti
ic
e
u
rb
io
et
nd
tr
ex
en
es m DECC ex ng effici ons abso tovoltan come ind heme co consump wer stat epressiv n supplie le DECC ha c
r
i
o
c
o
t
a
t
o
t
shale ptha cok ntal giga mass ph lectric in ped lull s ear audi er fuel p an rights revoluti s glut sh iesel nap en
bio
risi
l na
me
wat
um
um
de e
ting
onm
nucl
ol d
diese r environ l lighting worldwi jection p l gas oil ol diesel riticise h G extrac ates rig c ene petr ter envir fill
nd
te
fil
as
ob
os
LN
oa
ity
im
sc
etr
disas mer land ce quant enerate rk grid c nsport p ocracie supply tities est G jet ker lume dis sumer la uan
d
m
n
q
g
o
o
u
P
a
u
n
cons ient red armless air netw lation tr untry de es deman ers qua ethane L d ppmv v xation co t reduce less
e
c
o
h
u
i
n
E
a
v
c
p
t
in
r
L
ff
e
ne
rm
ry
ie
les e dioactiv TAINAB ading po ity globe ped rese ions eng it refine e concer ar panel les effic ctive ha BLE
t
l
S
a
c
l
a
e
A
d
o
i
l
r
m
a
l
o
U
b
o
omb issions S hore mis d commo red deve ing form sunami e responsi sehold s nient veh mb radi SUSTAIN mi
bo
re
lo
ck
n
ou
m
ffs
orl
ns
ve
at
ses e dfarms o ential w rable exp turing fra kushikm reductio pumps h rage con ydrogen emissio s offsho tial
rm
c
n
ss
es
in
ds
at
to
fu
sh
pa
ng w s GHGs e als com raulic fra eltdown ring goo lation he desert s lopment ouse gas g windfa HGs esse als
n
n
e
u
in
G
i
t
ti
li
m
yd
ve
es
su
nh
supp ines term oilfield h ellafield manufac lazing in n faciliti ction de ion gree lace hea supplies ines term lfie
s
je
g
el
oi
el
rt
kp
te
n
ut
oo
g pip pplicatio indscale ion impo raughts tions lag ocracy ob s contrib cars wor r genera illing pip plication sca
dr
at
m
nd
ld
sw
ed
nd
we
ap
ica
da
eere angerou ransform egetaria els impl posed de ment ne househo ottish Po xtension oneered erous wi ran
g
c
fu
rn
tt
tt
tt
ld
ro
sv
pi
le
fossi cal targe s gadget ators bio assess p ate gove ll terawa entrica S natura extract fossil dan cal targe gad
er
um
bi
eb
iti
ue
us
bu
nt
m
liti
EC
e pol ol train era incin argume arming d em kWh ower SS s petrole techniq uclei ato nable po l train b era
o
t
p
k
o
p
p
n
s
c
o
w
p
ai
on
rie
s car EREV Am nstructi y global physic sy .on EDF N discove round ro element ost sust ters carp EREV Am stru
e
E
ln
rg
co
lic
re
m
xc
on
ls
oln
Linco ssioning nergy po ns barre e ofgem tmosphe gist unde y uraniu ns Peme mostat m nge Linc ioning c ing
i
a
e
a
m
nc
io
er
to
lo
cit
iss
comm e change easure onseque releases dent geo ity capa m explos action th rge exch decomm lobal war sic
c
t
g
n
hy
od
is
st
lm
ha
n
d
clima therma pipelines openca ure depe n comm ip terror le kWh/ esla rec eneratio y policy barrels p ce
s
y
T
g
o
y
s
h
g
t
i
s
y
er
st
e
on
ns
uen
ni
str B es
at
tts u ansmissi rity indu utionEApr ontamin ting hard ment life echnolog G leakag hange en asure to s conseq t re
t
e
c
o
c
e
ib
N
tr
ea
re
as
ines ing auth ted distr riculture nector h d measu batteries hnique L l climate hermal m n pipelin y openc ssu
t
in
n
io
n
e
re
ea
ec
ag
str
sa
ate m kers reh modity n interco nts dema on dioxid rement t ns dispo atts units ransmiss rity indu ibution p re
tan
pri
oxi
qui
ultu
ctio
istr
com
ow
tho
arb
es t
ated aluable on extra bon foot ishing c safety re ances di watts kil coalmin ining au heated d ity agric onn
v
ti
a
st
e
ar
m
rc
qu
al
od
carce licy varia tments c burial s platform otest sub watts gig ion annu enerate tankers r le comm tion inte tpri
i
r
d
ac
CS
tg
m
oo
ut
po
pr
te
ab
ga
cars iply com ressed C ha disas impact atts me rs distrib llon burn insulate rce valu tion extr carbon f l sq
t
e
c
a
a
p
p
w
l
i
s
a
i
l
e
ia
c
n mu lean com llution A n consum lectricity ling tow ste bbl g mospher ethane s olicy var mitment CCS bur dis
at
m
po
ed
om
tio
sp
wa
Gc
coo
pha
ne
e GH structive contribu roductio convert thermal re liquid enhouse cient car ultiply c ompress lution Al ons
nc
ce
de
nm
gre
sp
pol
uffi
ing
ratu
geo
an c
2
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
4
PREFACE
MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
6
UK Energy: Policies and Problems
10
CHAPTER ONE:
MEASURING ENERGY
11
CHAPTER Tw0:
UK ENERGY-THE OVERALL PICTURE
13
CHAPTER THREE:
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
19
CHAPTER FOUR:
UK GHG EMISSIONS
31
CHAPTER FIvE:
WHAT A UK ENERGY POLICY MUST ACHIEVE
33
CHAPTER SIX:
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
39
CHAPTER SEvEN:
MEETING DEMAND WITH REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS
45
CHAPTER EIGHT:
CAN WE LIVE ON NON-EMITTING SOURCES ALONE?
51
CHAPTER NINE:
PROS AND CONS OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY SOURCES FOR THE UK
55
APPENDIX:
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
65
3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The original version of this Guide was read by
Dr Chris Michaels of the Department of Energy
and Climate Change and approved as factually
accurate. I remain indebted to him.
I have also had valuable help from BEACONS
volunteers, Patricia Fenner and Jacob Godber,
both of whom have been involved with all
three Guides. Jacob completed his geography
degree at the University of Worcester in the
summer of 2015. More recently, valuable help
has been given by a young PhD graduate of
the University of Birmingham in theoretcal
chemistry, Dr Duncan Campbell.
Pat's contribution was originally the
extremely valuable one of proof reading.
One final point before you begin: please let me
know of any mistakes or facts that seem to be
wrong, or of wording that is not clear, or of any
other criticisms you have, by emailing me at:
[email protected]
The great advantage of having this Guide online only is that changes can be made at any
time.
David Terry, June 2017
Disclaimer
While every effort is made to provide accurate
information on the subject matters of the guides,
neither BEACONS, the text author nor the advisers
make any representation, express or implied,
about the accuracy of the information in the
guides nor do they accept any legal responsibility
or liability for any errors or omissions.
Copyright © 2017 BEACONS. All rights reserved
She has since learnt how to undertake the
formatting of my manuscripts and now
does that as well.
I am indebted to all the above. I am, of
course responsible for any errors that
remain.
Original version May 2012. This revised &
updated version, June 2017.
Each Guide is updated as developments
occur. This can lead to inconsistencies if
we fail to update similar information
elsewhere. The date of the update is
usually given so that you can tell which is
the most recent information. But if you do
spot any such inconsistencies, please let
me know by email at [email protected].
Website
We had the good fortune to have a new
website from April 2012 designed and
managed in a voluntary capacity by Janet
and Kevin McCarthy of Web Design Sense.
We are much indebted to both of them.
In 2014 we were approached by Tristan
Cousteau who said he would be interested
in becoming involved, as a volunteer, in the
website. He had gained a law degree some
10 years previously but now wanted to
explore changing career to IT and websites.
He has managed, and substantially
redesigned, our website ever since with
.
great success.
The formatting of this and the other two
Guides was originally done by a young
graphic designer, Natasha Payton, and then
by Jane Anson of Independent Design.
DT
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
4
The aim of this, the last of the three
BEACONS guides to climate change,
is to give an overview of the energy
and climate change situation in the
United Kingdom.
As with the two previous guides, the
aim is not to persuade the reader of
any particular policy but to set out
the facts and arguments in order to
help you, the reader, come to your
own conclusions.
Argument on climate change matters can
become heated. I hope that this guide will
help the reader to base their opinions and
arguments on the facts.
Obviously, the government must aim to
ensure the country’s energy needs are
met while at the same time reducing our
greenhouse gas emissions sufficiently to
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Photo: Wikipedia
Introduction
Natural
electricity
display
make our proper contribution to curbing
global warming. But are they doing the right
things?
Exercises are included in the text from time
to time. The aim of these is to get the reader
thinking about what comes next in the text
and hence to understand it better. They are,
of course, optional, but I hope that doing
them will prove helpful.
Mainly with school students in mind, I try to
explain things that may be unfamiliar to a 16
year-old. I hope that adult readers will not
5
Eggborough coal fired power station, Yorkshire
be too irritated by what may be, for them,
unnecessary explanations.
Photo: Wikipedia
Petrochemical refinery, Grangemouth, UK
Photo: DECC
Like many other developed countries, the
UK now has a government department
responsible for all matters to do with energy
and climate change called, unsurprisingly,
the Department for Energy and Climate
Change. Knowing something about this
is obviously crucial to understanding
government policies so I begin with a Preface
about the Department.
Royd Farm, Yorkshire
The M25
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
6
PREFACE
MINISTERIAL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR
ENERGY AND CLIMATE CHANGE
ABOLITION OF THE DECC
Until the Climate Change Act 2008
responsibilities for energy and climate change
were spread across several government
departments. This was increasingly unsatisfactory
and the Labour prime minister at the time,
Gordon Brown, pulled all these responsibilities
together under the new Department of Energy
and Climate Change (the DECC).
In July 2016 the new
Prime Minister, Theresa
May, abolished the DECC
and absorbed its
responsibilities into a new
department called the
Department for Business,
Energy and Industrial
Strategy, headed by The
Rt Hon Greg Clark. After
the election of June 6
2017, Mr Clark was reappointed by the prime
minister.
The Rt Hon Greg Clark,
MP, Secretary of State
for Business, Energy
and Industrial
Strategy
However a new deputy
to Mr Clark was
appointed; Claire Perry,
MP (pictured left). Her
title is: Minister of State
at the Department for
Business, Energy and
Industrial Strategy.
A first action was to announce that the
government's long-awaited Clean Growth Plan
covering the period to 2032 will be made public
after the summer recess.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Claire Perry will work with
the new Energy Minister
Richard Harrington MP.
With the official title of
Parliamentary Under
Secretary of State,
Minister for Energy and
Industry, he is responsible
for:












industrial strategy
energy
nuclear
oil and gas, including shale gas
low carbon generation
security of supply
electricity and gas wholesale markets and
networks
smart meters and smart systems
international energy
energy security, including resilience and
emergency planning
industrial policy
aerospace
The Department of the
Environment also influences
government policy on climate
change. After the June 2017
election the prime minister
replaced Andrea Leadsom as
the head of this department.
She was replaced by The Rt.
Hon. Michael Gove MP
(pictured right).
7
Policy is decided by ministers who are
either MPs or Lords. Officials administer
the department and advise ministers.
They are civil servants appointed by the
head of the civil service. Only ministers
speak on departmental policy.
WHAT THE DECC DID
Here is an edited version of what the DECC stated
on its website.
The purpose of the DECC is to work to make
sure the UK has secure, clean, affordable
energy supplies and to promote international
action to mitigate climate change.
The department is responsible for
 action on climate change – leading
government efforts to mitigate climate
change internationally and by cutting UK
greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80%
by 2050 renewable energy
 supporting growth – delivering our
policies in a way that maximises the
benefits to the economy in terms of
jobs, growth and investment,
including by making the most of our
existing oil and gas reserves and
seizing the opportunities presented
by the rise of the global green
economy
 managing the UK’s energy legacy
safely, securel
The department's priorities are
1. Ensuring the UK has a secure and
resilient energy system
2. Keeping energy bills as low as
possible
3. Securing ambitious international
action on climate change and
reducing carbon emissions costeffectively at home
4. Managing the UK’s energy legacy
safely and responsibly
 sourcing at least 15% of our energy from
renewables by 2020
 energy security – making sure UK
businesses and households have secure
supplies of energy for light and power,
heat and transport
 affordability – delivering low-carbon energy
at the least cost
 fairness – making sure the costs and
benefits of our policies are distributed fairly
so that we protect the most vulnerable
Torness nuclear power station
Mail On-line
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
8
THE COMMITTEE ON CLIMATE
CHANGE (the CCC)
The 2008 Climate Change Act which set up the
DECC also established the CCC, an independent
body charged with advising the government on
setting and meeting carbon budgets and on
preparing for the impacts of climate change.
The CCC publishes reports from time to time.
You can read them on their website: http://
www.theccc.org.uk/
Its most important work are the Carbon Budget
assessments. These are required by law. The Fifth
Carbon Budget assessment was published on May
2016 and covers the period 2028-32.
CARBON BUDGETS AND TARGETS
– EXTRACTS FROM THE CCC ADVICE
The Climate Change Act 2008 established a target
for the UK to reduce its emissions by at least
80% from 1990 levels by 2050.
To ensure that regular progress is made towards
this long-term target, the Act also established a
system of five-yearly carbon budgets, to serve as
stepping stones on the way.
The first four carbon budgets, leading to 2027,
have been set in law. The UK is currently in the
second carbon budget period (2013-17). Meeting
the fourth carbon budget (2023-27) will require
that emissions be reduced by 50% on 1990 levels
by 2025.
The Committee published its advice to
government on the fifth carbon budget in
November 2015, covering the period 2028-2032.
The government was required by the Act to
introduce legislation to meet its targets during
2016. This was done in July of that year.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
RATIONALE FOR CARBON BUDGETS
By providing benchmarks towards the 2050 target,
the carbon budgets ensure regular progress is
being made and provide a level of predictability for
UK firms and households to plan and invest for a
low-carbon economy.
Furthermore, it is not simply the level of emissions
in a future target year that we should be concerned
about. It is cumulative emissions over the whole
period that matter. Under a system of carbon
budgets, every tonne of GHG emitted between now
and 2050 will count.
BASIS FOR LEVELS OF CARBON
BUDGETS
In providing its advice to Government on the level
of carbon budgets the CCC uses criteria set out in
the Climate Change Act. It has assessed, by sector,
what can be achieved to reduce emissions at least
cost, taking account of available technologies and
government policy and recommended that:
• energy efficiency improvements are a cost
effective way to contribute to emission
reductions whilst saving money for individuals
and business;
• fostering innovation in technology, although
having some cost in the short term, will
contribute substantially to emissions reductions
and prove economical in future years
• Other measures with a cost below the
Government’s projected carbon price are
available and should be taken as a cost
effective option on the path to the long-term
target.
The budgets must also be consistent with UK
obligations towards EU targets, and as a
contribution to required global emission reductions.
9
PREFACE
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY & CLIMATE CHANGE
Think Tanks
A think tank is a non-profit making organisation
that engages in research in a particular field.
Here are three that are influential in climate
change and energy.
The Green Alliance:
http://www.green-alliance.org.uk/
is an environmental think tank working to
ensure UK political leaders deliver ambitious
solutions to global environmental issues.
For 30 years, they have worked with NGO,
business, and political leaders. Their main
strategic themes are: political leadership,
green living, climate and energy futures,
designing out waste, and sustainable
economy.
The Carbon Trust:
http://www.carbontrust.com/home
Created in 2001, the Carbon Trust is now
a world expert in low carbon issues and
strategies, carbon footprinting and low carbon
technology development and deployment.
According to their website, their work has saved
our clients £4.5billion in energy costs and cut
their customers’ carbon emissions by 47Mt.
The Renewable Energy Foundation:
http://www.ref.org.uk/forum is a registered
charity promoting sustainable development
for the benefit of the public by means
of energy conservation and the use of
renewable energy and has no political
affiliation or corporate membership.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
10
UK Energy: Policies and
Problems
There are essentially three main aims of UK
energy policy.
First: Securing supply.
Second: Reducing CO2 emissions.
Third: Keeping prices affordable – for households
and for businesses.
It is far from obvious that these aims are all
achievable together. government policies have
tended to get ever more complicated as first one
and then another of these aims is given priority.
Securing Supply
The policy is to have a mix of different types
of fuel and for each to be provided from
several different sources, including UK ones.
The mix changes from one year to the next as
the energy companies shop around for the
best value.
Reducing CO2 Emissions
The second largest component of low
carbon was bioenergy. Wind contributed
only 0.8% of the total. Big increases in
both nuclear and wind are planned. To
encourage these, the government pays
much more for electricity from these
sources. But wind power is intermittent
and needs conventional power stations to
provide power when the wind does not
blow.
Heat Loss from a
Badly Insulated
House
Up to 25%
through the
roof
Up to 25%
through
doors and
windows
Up to 35%
through
outside
walls
Up to 15% through
ground floors
In 2008 The Climate Change Act, supported by all
parties, says we must reduce emissions by at
least 80% from 1990 levels by 2050 and by
50% during the period 2023 to 2027.
In 2012 the UK obtained 14% of its total energy
(that is electricity, gas and transport fuel) from
low carbon sources, with two thirds of this from
nuclear power.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
A government scheme to give grants
for insulating older houses was
abandoned in July 2015.
In 2014 the sources of electricity
generation were: Coal 30%; Gas 31%;
Renewables 20%; Nuclear 19%.
11
CHAPTER ONE:
MEASURING ENERGY
There is a bewildering array on offer.
Electricity is usually given in Watts,
Megawatts, Gigawatts or in kilowatt-hours
etc; gas in British Thermal Units or in a
measure of volume such as cubic metres, or
even in tons; oil in barrels (Who knows how
many gallons make a barrel?) or tons, and so
on and so on.
tells me they charge me
for electricity £0.2192
a day plus £0.1118
per kWh and for gas
£0.2192 plus £0.0354
per kWh.
Photo: Amazon
UNITS FOR MEASURING
AND COMPARING ENERGY
CONSUMPTION AND THE POWER
OF POWER STATIONS
For the whole of
the UK, the average
consumption of energy per person is about
125 kWh a day, which I shall write as
125kWh/d/p. This is obviously far too small a
unit for total national consumption, where the
terawatt-hour or TWh makes more sense.
Tera (always an upper case T, but a lower
case k for 103) denotes 1012, that is a million
million or a thousand billion or a trillion.
Wikipedia
Power is the rate at which energy is
consumed or produced. It is measured in
kWh per day, abbreviated to kW. This is
obviously too small a unit for a power
station’s output.
Worcester-Bosch website
David MacKay gets over this problem by
using the kilowatt-hour, abbreviated to kWh,
for individual consumption. He explains in
Sustainable Energy how all other measures
can be converted into kWh (the same
abbreviation is used for one or many kilowatthours). A kWh appears on electricity bills as
one unit of electricity. It is what you would
consume by putting on one (one kilowatt) bar
of an electric fire for one hour. My supplier
So for power stations we use MW or
megawatts (a million watts or a thousand
kW), GW or gigawatts (a thousand MW),
TW or terawatts (a thousand GW).
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
12
MISLEADING UNITS
Current electricity consumption in the UK
averages about 40 GW and, because of
peaks, requires a total power of about 60 GW.
Even not counting very small wind and other
generators, power stations functioning at the
moment vary in power from Wilton at 100 MW
to Drax at 3870 MW or 3.87 GW.
This range is so great that it is pretty
meaningless to talk about, say, a medium
sized power station. But that doesn’t stop the
media doing exactly this.
But by far the most common misleading
unit is the ‘home’ as in ‘this windfarm will
generate enough electricity to power 300,000
homes’. This actually means the average
household’s domestic electricity consumption
only. Not the household’s home heating, let
alone all the energy consumed by members of
the household in driving cars, in being at their
workplace or all the other energy consuming
things we do or make use of.
Ofgem estimates average domestic electricity
consumption to be 3,300 kWh per year, or
(dividing by 365) 9 kWh/day per home. There
are on average about 2.6 people per household,
so the electricity to ‘power a home’ works out
at 3.5 kWh/d/p, while average total energy
consumed per person is 125kWh/d/p.
So a windfarm generating enough electricity
to power 300,000 homes is contributing,
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
averaged across the whole UK, 300,000
divided by 25 million homes (BBC figure)
times 3.5 kWh/d/p. This works out to 0.04
kWh/d/p. As the average for the whole
population is 125 kWh/d/p, we should need
100 such windfarms to generate 3.2% of the
country’s total energy consumption. MacKay
estimates that to generate 16% of our
present electicity consumption we should
need to have windmills on the windiest 10%
of the whole country.
It may not be as exotic as Venice,but a
giant man-made lagoon in Swansea Bay is
expected to generate electricity for 120,000
homes. (The Times, February 7, 2014)
The company's website gives the estimated
output as 240 MW, but then rather spoils it
by telling us that the amount of water that
would flow through the turbines daily is
100,000 Olympic swimming pools!
Sadly, there are many useless or misleading
measures frequently found in the media or
politicians’ pronouncements: Olympic sized
swimming pools, London buses, football
pitches, cups of tea, and so on and so on.
13
CHAPTER TWO:
UK ENERGY-THE OVERALL PICTURE
WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW...
In deciding what the energy policy of the UK
should be, we need to start with the present
situation; that is, with an audit of where we
are now.
7. What
national and international
commitments we have made.
Did you get all of these? And did you think of
some that I didn’t?
EXERCISE
EXERCISE
Spend a few minutes writing down the
questions that an audit would need to
cover. Then compare your list with mine.
AN AUDIT OF THE CURRENT
SITUATION: MY LIST
Here is my list of what we need to know
about our current energy consumption in this
country before we can make a judgement
about policy for the future...
1. What
the total energy consumption of the
country is.
2. How the amount of energy we consume is
broken down into different usages.
3. How much CO2 and other greenhouse gases
(GHG) are emitted by the various usages.
4. What measures are currently in place to
reduce our energy consumption and GHG
emissions, and how successful they seem
to be.
5. What the sources of our energy are.
6. How reliable these sources are.
MacKay gives three main things we use
energy for. What do you think they are?
On average for the whole population, we
consume 125kWh a day. This is the average:
most adults will, of course, consume far more
while the very young, for example, far less.
EXERCISE ANSWERS
Here is what he says... MacKay (p203)
estimates the following for 2008:
• Transport (of both humans and stuff) uses
40kWh per day per person, or 40kWh/d/p.
Most of this energy is currently consumed
as petrol, diesel, or kerosene.
•
Heating
of air and water uses another
40kWh/d/p, most of which is currently
provided by natural gas.
•
Delivered
electricity amounts to 18kWh/
d/p and uses fuel (mainly coal, gas
and nuclear) with an energy content of
45kWh/d/p. That is, we only get 18kWh
that we can use from every 45kWh that
are consumed in powering the power
stations.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
14
•
of the remaining 27kWh/d/p go up
25
cooling towers and 2 units/d/p is lost in
the wires of the distribution network.
Putting these figures in percentages, the total
amount of energy consumed in this country
breaks down as follows...
•
Transport-people and goods
32%
•
Heating,
hot water for
houses, schools, hospitals,
businesses, factories etc
32%
•
Electricity:
- Delivered to houses,
schools etc
14.4%
- Lost in power stations
20%
- Lost in transmission wires
1.6%
Total
100%
EXERCISE
There is a big omission from the figures
above. Can you see what it is? (clue: it was
something that much concerned developing
countries at the UN Copenhagen climate
conference in December 2009).
EXERCISE ANSwER
The answer is all the energy and GHG
emissions involved in producing overseas the
manufactured goods we consume.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
ANNUAL ENERGY CONSUMPTION PER
PERSON
If you take the annual consumption for the
whole country of all the different forms of
energy, convert them all to the same units
of kWh, and divide by 365 and again by
64,000,000, the population of the UK, (the
figure released by the Office for National
Statistics on June 26, 2014 was 64.1
million for mid-2013) the answer is
125kWh per day per person, or
125kWh/d/p. This is about the European
average, and is roughly half the USA
figure, twice the Chinese and many times
that of the poorest nations.
Not all this 125kWh gets through to us
to use. About 25kWh of electricity goes
up cooling towers at power stations and
a further 2kWh is lost in the wires of the
distribution network.
15
Until about 25 years ago, power stations,
coalmines and the network of electric
transmission lines and gas pipelines were
owned and run by the state.
In the 1980s the Conservative government
with Margaret Thatcher as prime minister
(until 1990) embarked on a programme
of privatisation which continued until the
Conservatives lost power in 1997, the final
privatisation being of the railways. As a
consequence, today all these are run by
private companies but subject to state
supervision and in accordance with state
planning.
State supervision for any industry has two
main aims;
•
ensure there is true competition which
to
will benefit customers by lower prices,
•
to ensure compliance with state planning.
Supervisory bodies are usually called ‘Ofsomething’, such as Ofsted for education,
Ofcom for the communications industry. The
one for gas and electricity companies is Ofgem.
EXERCISE
EXERCISE ANSWERS
The UK energy market is dominated by six
large companies. The ‘big six’ are:
E.on German owned, it is the world’s
largest private energy company and
operates in over 30 countries.
EDF Energy is one of the UK’s largest
energy companies and its largest producer
of low-carbon electricity. A whollyowned subsidiary of the EDF Group, one
of Europe’s largest energy groups, it
generates around one fifth of the UK’s
electricity.
Npower is a UK-based electricity and gas
supply generation company, formerly
known as Innogy plc. In 2002 it was
acquired by RWE of Germany and became
RWE npower plc.
SSE is a trading name of SSE Energy
Supply Limited which is a member of the
Scottish and Southern Energy Group.
Electricity and gas generation and supply
are dominated by six giant companies.
Can you name them?
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
16
CHAPTER TWO
UK ENERGY-THE OVERALL PICTURE
Ofgem
Centrica is the largest supplier of gas to
domestic customers in the UK, and one
of the largest suppliers of electricity,
operating under the trading names
“Scottish Gas” in Scotland and “British
Gas” in the rest of the UK.
Scottish Power has its headquarters in
Glasgow. In 2006 it became a subsidiary
of the Spanish utility Iberdrola. It is the
Distribution Network Operator (DNO) for
the central and southern Scotland and
the Merseyside and North Wales, but sells
electricity across the UK. It also owns PPM
Energy in the United States.
There are around another 14 small
companies which buy gas and electricity
from generating companies and sell on to
customers. The big six are also generating
companies so buy their supplies from
themselves.
Here is what it says about itself on its
website.
Ofgem is the Office of the Gas
and Electricity Markets. Protecting
consumers is our first priority. We do
this by promoting competition, wherever
appropriate, and regulating the monopoly
companies which run the gas and
electricity networks. The interests of gas
and electricity consumers are their
interests taken as a whole, including their
interests in the reduction of green-house
gases and in the security of the supply of
gas and electricity to them.
Other priorities and influences include:
to secure Britain’s energy
• helping
supplies by promoting competitive gas
and electricity markets - and regulating
them so that there is adequate
investment in the networks, and
• contributing
to the drive to curb
climate change and other work aimed
at sustainable development by, for
example:
Helping the gas and electricity industries
to achieve environmental improvements
as efficiently as possible; and taking
account of the needs of vulnerable
customers, particularly older people,
those with disabilities and those on low
incomes.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
17
The extract below from the table on page 14
shows that 36% of all our energy (excluding
the energy in imported goods) is used to
generate electricity.
Electricity: Delivered to houses,
schools etc....................................... 14.4%
Lost in power stations........................... 20%
Lost in transmission wires..................... 1.6%
UK SOURCES OF POwER FOR
ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION 2015
In 2010 gas and coal, the main fossil fuels
used in electricity generation, accounted for
75% of generation. By 2014 the figure was
56% and by 2015 it was down to 50%. The
government’s aim is to cease using coal
altogether by 2025.
Nuclear fell slightly to 17% in 2014 but rose
again last year to 20% to cover outages in two
coal power stations and the conversion of the
second of six generating plants at the Drax
power station to burning biomass (see also p
18). The future of nuclear is in some doubt as
old stations have to close while the major
planned new one, Hinkley Point, which was
scheduled to be completed by next year, has
not even started to be built (see also p 27).
Renewables share rose dramatically from 2%
in 2012 to 24% in 2015, and is said to be over
25% now. The contributions to the total for
renewables in 2014 were: biomass 50%, wind
24%, wood 17%, hydro 5% solar 4%. A
breakdown for 2015 is not yet available.
Nevertheless, the amount it was necessary to
import rose from 3% in 2012 to 6% in 2015,
and many experts say that the margin of our
total generating capacity over demand is
dangerously low. We import electricity by two
undersea cables, called interconnectors, one
from France and the other from The
Netherlands. In 2014, two thirds of the total
came from France.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
18
CHAPTER TWO
UK ENERGY-THE OVERALL PICTURE
Coal is by far the biggest emitter of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) when burnt to
produce electricity.
Gas fuelled power stations produce only a
half to two-thirds the amount of GHGs in
producing the same amount of electricity.
(The actual amount depends on the type of
coal - some are dirtier than others - and the
type of gas). And windfarms and nuclear
power stations produce virtually none at all.
Drax in Yorkshire is the UK’s largest power
station, producing about 4Gw or 7% of our
electricity. Originally it was entirely coal-fired,
but helped by large government grants it has
now converted three of its six turbines to being
fuelled by wood pellets imported from the US in
specially designed tankers. Seventeen train
loads a day arrive at Drax to be held in one of
four enormous silos (see photo).
Photo BBC
SO WHY DON'T WE STOP
BURNING COAL AND SWITCH
TO GAS OR NUCLEAR FOR
ELECTRICITY GENERATION?
Photo: Wikipedia
I’ll leave this question hanging in the air
and come back to it later when we look at
the UK’s energy policies, although I’m sure
you can think of at least one reason.
The next chapter will look at fuels currently
used in the UK to generate electricity. But
don’t forget that around 35% of all the
energy we consume is used to drive our cars
and trucks; and the vast majority of this
comes from oil in the form of petrol or diesel.
.
Photo The Guardian
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
The owners plan to convert the remaining
three turbines by 2025. They claim that overall
net carbon emissions are zero, but this is
disputed. See Chapter 9 for more on this. If
the claim is accepted, as the UK government
does, then on days when electricity generation
came entirely from non carbon emitting
sources, Drax provided 20% of the total.
In 2014 Drax secured an EU grant of 300m
euros to build the first carbon capture and
storage plant in the UK with the liquefied CO2
from the remaining coal-fired turbines to be
stored in chambers under the North Sea which
had held natural oil and gas. However Drax
later withdrew from this and decided to convert
all turbines to wood pellet burning instead.
19
CHAPTER THREE:
OIL,COAL,GAS AND NUCLEAR
UK OIL CONSUMPTION
GHG EMISSION TARGETS
As you have seen in Chapter Two, 32% of the
UK’s total energy consumption in 2008 was
for transporting people and things. Nearly
all of this is in the form of petrol and diesel
refined from oil. Oil is not used for much else.
About 1% of electricity is generated by oil,
and about 5% of homes are heated by oil.
Using figures already given, these add about
another 2% to the total energy consumption.
So we shall not be far out in assuming 35%
of the UK’s total energy consumption comes
from oil.
If the UK is to achieve its target of
reducing CO2 emissions to only 20% of
the amount for 1990 by 2050, there will
have to be a major shift from fossil fuels
– coal, gas and oil (including petrol and
diesel)
Oil, like coffee, is produced by only a small
number of countries but demand comes from
every country on the globe. The biggest oil
exporter is Saudi Arabia. Which could be why
the developed democracies seldom criticise
human rights abuses and gender inequality
there.
As we saw in the previous chapter, in 2012
85% of our electricity was generated from
coal, gas or nuclear, with coal giving 39%,
gas 27% and nuclear 19%. Coal consumption
has soared and gas consumption fallen
because the USA shale gas revolution reduced
demand there and the surplus sold cheaply
abroad.
What the DECC does
not say is that much
of this reduction in
energy consumption
is a result of a decline
in manufacturing and
the importing of more
manufactured goods.
Or, as some would say,
thereby exporting our GHG
emissions. One expert who
makes this point is Oxford
professor Dieter Helm.
His latest book is called
The Carbon Crunch: How We’re
Getting Climate Change Wrong
- and How to Fix it
www.infowars.com/
images/helm.jpg
Pic from Amazon
Oil remains essential for the world’s motor
vehicles and is the world’s most traded
commodity (believe it or not, the second most
traded commodity is coffee).
The DECC statistics show that from 1990
to 2011 there has been a decrease in UK
GHG emissions of around 23%, while energy
consumption has fallen by about 6 per cent.
A number of factors explain this effect, such
as changes in the efficiency in electricity
generation and switching from coal to less
carbon intensive fuels such as gas.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
20
Here is a quote from an article by him
published in The Times in February 2012:
The Kyoto calculations make it look as if
Britain is making progress. Our emissions
were down more than 15 per cent between
1990 and 2005. But this is partly an illusion.
We were deindustrialising: buying energy
intensive goods from abroad rather than
producing them at home. So while our
production of carbon fell, our consumption
rose. China does much of our polluting
for us — and that is why no progress has
been made in limiting emissions. Rather
than blaming China, we should accept our
responsibility. Driving up our energy prices
drives energy- intensive production overseas.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
BARRELS OF OIL
Oil is usually given in barrels. The reason
is that when oil was first traded in the
late 18th Century it was transported
in barrels previously used for wine and
other products. It wasn’t until a century
later that the size of a barrel of oil was
standardised at 42 US gallons or 35 UK
gallons (did you know that a US gallon is
smaller than a UK one?).
The abbreviation for one barrel is bl,
and for several, bbl. A further quirk is
that Mbbl means a thousand barrels and
MMbbl a million barrels.
21
HISTORY OF THE UK COAL
INDUSTRY
Coal mining in the United Kingdom dates back
to Roman times and occurred in many different
parts of the country.
In 1926 strikes and lockouts in the coal mines led
a general strike to try to
force the government to
reverse wage reductions
and longer hours
generally. It lasted nine
days, and failed. The
miners held out for much
longer before being forced
by hardship to call off
their strikes. They felt
that they had achieved
nothing. Great bitterness
was the main legacy.
But demand continued to fall and mines to close,
leading to a major, and very ugly, confrontation
with the Conservative government of Margaret
Thatcher when most but not all miners followed
Arthur Scargill and struck to try to prevent mine
closures. The government won.
In 1994 the much reduced coal industry was
privatised.
The Subsidised Mineowner—
Poor Beggar! from Trade
Union Unity Magazine
(1925)
Twenty years later, the post-war Attlee Labour
government nationalised the mines. And,
although the war had caused a big increase in
demand for coal, this began to slide again.
Miners saw their livelihoods threatened again
and as demand fell, militancy increased.
In 1974 the miners union (the NUM)
demanded large wage increases and when
the Conservative government, their employer
since nationalisation, refused, they called a
strike. This led to a three day week, a
general election and the return of a Labour
government
UK COAL TODAY
After 1994 coal mining continued to decline and
had practically disappeared by the end of the
century. Employment in the coal mines fell from
a peak of 1,191,000 in 1920 to a mere 2,000 in
2015.
The last deep coal mine in the UK closed on 18
December 2015. Twenty-six open cast mines still
remain open.
Yet, as the chart on P 17 shows, coal is still a
major source of electricity generation. Most of
this is imported, and the government intends to
cease using coal altogether by 2025.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
22
CHAPTER THREE
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
THE PROBLEM WITH COAL...
is, of course, that it emits a lot of CO2
when burnt. Gas emits much less, only a
half to two thirds for the same amount of
electricity generated. Many of our dirtiest
coal power stations are scheduled to close
in the next few years, having reached the
end of their lives. Many will be replaced
by gas. This will reduce overall emissions.
The government is banking on Carbon
Capture and Storage (CCS) becoming
commercially feasible. But one estimate
is that its cost would roughly double the
price of the electricity generated.
US Coal Exports
In the first quarter of 2017, the U.S. exported
22.3 million short tons of coal (11% of total
production) to dozens of countries around the
world; the largest markets were the
Netherlands (15% of all exports), South
Korea (9.5%), and India (8.5%).
Coal exports have decreased since 2012 as
U.S. coal production has declined, mostly
because cheaper natural gas and renewable
energy sources have decreased the demand
for coal as a fuel for electricity generation.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Photo: Wikipedia
Countries and companies, just like individuals,
shop around so that the percentages change
from one year to the next.
Coal exports have increased since late 2016
but are still roughly 30% below 2012 levels.
Coal being delivered to a power station.
Drax alone averages 140 deliveries a week,
each of 1,400 tonnes.
Photo: The Times
Significant volumes were also imported from
the US, Canada, China and Indonesia.
23
Photo: Wikipedia
NORTH SEA OIL AND GAS
Discoveries of petroleum and natural gas
beneath the seafloor began in 1959.
The North Sea has become Western Europe’s
most important oil and gas production area.
The two largest producers are Norway and the
United Kingdom, and until 1990 the annual
yields of the two countries were comparable.
Now, however, Norway is the clear leader with
the UK second. Other minor producers include
Denmark, The Netherlands and Germany.
Photo: BBC
New fields are being explored and developed
farther north in the Norwegian and Barents seas.
A flame is still burning in the stack above a North Sea
platform from which gas has been leaking for three days.
BBC March 28, 2012
A rig under construction.
Almost all of the structure
will end up submerged
Discoveries west of the Shetland Islands have
increased the United Kingdom’s proven oil
reserves.
Natural gas is becoming an increasingly
important source of energy for Western
Europe, and several major gas pipelines have
been constructed. The most important to the
UK now is the Langeled pipeline from Norway,
completed in 2006. It is also the most
advanced, the gas being processed on the
sea floor in the Norwegian Troll field. When it
broke down during the cold spell in January
2010, there was immediately insufficient gas
to meet demand and around 100 businesses
had their supply cut off. Fortunately, the
problem was rectified and supplies resumed
within a few hours.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
24
CHAPTER THREE
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
GAS BY SHIP: that is LIQUIFIED
NATURAL GAS OR LNG
LNG is not a new sort of gas but a new way of
moving natural gas. On its own it is making
a huge difference to world gas sales and
to the supply of gas to the UK in particular.
Combined with discovery of a method
of extracting shale gas this adds up to a
revolution in energy supplies.
A new LNG terminal opened at Milford Haven
in March 2009. The LNG is converted back
into ordinary gas and fed into a pipeline to
Gloucestershire where it connects with the
national network of gas pipelines. At the
moment most LNG comes from Qatar, but
other countries are building terminals for the
export of LNG.
The first shipload of liquefied US shale gas to
the UK arrived in September 2016. Such
shiploads are now frequent.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
25
UK SHALE GAS (See also page 29)
In the last three years shale gas has been
found in almost every part of the world, and
extraction by fracking is taking place in many
countries. The biggest confirmed find in
Europe is in Poland. In the UK, shale gas has
been found near Blackpool in Lancashire and
despite strong opposition locally and from
green organisations, permission was given in
December 2012 for fracking to go ahead.
Fracking was put on hold in 2011, after
test drilling by Cuadrilla. However there are
now concerns that the extraction process
could have two serious side-effects; causing
earthquakes and releasing large amounts of
the greenhouse gas methane. The process
also requires large amounts of water, itself a
scarce and valuable commodity, especially for
agriculture and chemicals. Opponents such as
Greenpeace say that high pressure water at
depths of 10,000ft could penetrate the water
table and contaminate domestic supplies.
Photo: Daily Telegraph
The Cuadrilla site near Preston, possible
precursor of many more
The British Geological Survey reported in early
February, 2013, that deposits are very much
greater than previously thought and are to be
found throughout southern England.
This caused a major split in the coalition, which
persists, with the Conservative Chancellor
wanting rapid exploitation of shale gas and the
building of at least 30 gas power stations, while
the Lib Dem energy secretary, Edward Davey,
wants the emphasis to be on wind power.
The Russian annexation of Crimea in March
2014 gave a major impetus to exploitation of
indigenous sources of energy, especially
shale gas.
Russia is Europe's biggest supplier of gas,
providing around a third of the continent's
needs. While the UK is nothing like as
dependent on Russian gas as some countries,
getting most of our imports from Norwegian
pipelines or liquefied natural gas (LNG)
shipments from further afield, about 20% of
our gas is imported from Russia via continental
European storage sites.
One obstacle to fracking is the law on trespass.
This requires the company to get permission to
drill from everyone who owns land above the
horizontal bore hole, even if it is a mile below
the surface. Mining for coal, however, is
exempt from this requirement, providing no
damage is caused to structures on the surface.
The government announced in June,2014 that
it will change the law so that, subject to the
outcome of a consultation, developers will be
able to run shale gas pipelines under people's
land without their permission.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
26
CHAPTER THREE
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
NUCLEAR FISSION
NUCLEAR vISION
Unlike oil, gas and, to some extent, coal,
nuclear energy is used solely for generating
electricity. We don’t, yet, have nuclear
powered cars or homes heated by individual
nuclear power stations! But we do, of course,
have nuclear powered submarines.
As we saw in Chapter 2, 36% of our energy
consumption is attributable to generating
electricity, although only 40% of this is
actually usable (14.4 as a percentage of 36).
Currently, we need 60GW of generating
capacity to meet total demand from the
whole country. But we shall, of course, need
far more, perhaps double this or more, if we
move to powering all our motor vehicles and
trains by electricity. More on this later. And
we also saw that 20% of electricity in 2015
was generated by nuclear power stations.
Combining these figures, it would seem that
about 7% of our total consumption of energy
comes from nuclear power.
All current nuclear power stations use nuclear
fission. Uranium, an exceptionally heavy
element, has its heavy nuclei split into
medium-sized nuclei, releasing energy.
The essential property is that the nuclear
energy available per atom is roughly one
million times bigger than the chemical energy
per atom of typical fuels. This means that the
amounts of fuel and waste that must be dealt
with at a nuclear reactor can be up to one
million times smaller than the amounts of fuel
and waste at an equivalent fossil-fuel.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Photo: www.sellafieldsites.com/
work in Cumbria, England, constructing the world’s first
nuclear power station began in 1947. Then known as
windscale, it was opened by the Queen in 1956
In 2009, Ed Miliband, the then Energy
Secretary, unveiled plans for the most
ambitious expansion of nuclear power in
Europe. It was a bold vision. Britain would
build up to 12 new reactors, he said, on 10
sites stretching from Somerset to
Cumbria. By the late 2020s about 30% of
its electricity would come from nuclear
power – up from 20% in 2015
Photo: Mail Online http://www.dailymail.co.uk
The existing power station at wylfa, on
Anglesey,a government site for new reactors
27
NO TAXPAYER INvESTMENT
This plan was adopted by the government with one
crucial addition: no public money was to be
invested. Instead, consortiums would invest their
own money in return for a guaranteed price for
their electricity.
BREXIT AND NUCLEAR SUPPLIES
The UK imports all the uranium needed for its
nuclear power stations and the isotopes used in
MRI scanners and various cancer treatments. This
is done under an international agreement called
Euratom which includes the most stringent safety
procedures. Euratom is not part of the EU but the
prime minister, Theresa May, has said we must
withdraw from it as it is under the jurisdiction of
the European Court of Justice, thereby infringing
our autonomy. Whether we will remains to be seen.
Furthermore, the government has undertaken to
buy Hinkley electricity for 30 years at what is
now twice the market price. The National Audit
Office is not impressed. But the government says
that the deal means extra costs are borne by
EDF, not the UK taxpayer.
Many think the deal should be cancelled, but to
do so would risk triggering up to £22 billion in
compensation payments to EDF, unless the plant
is still not running by 2033.
NUCLEAR REALITY
The UK currently (July 2017) has 15 reactors
generating about 20% of its electricity but almost
half of this capacity is to be retired by 2025. See
map in next column.
In November 2015 the government set out new
policy priorities for UK energy, involving phasing
out by 2025 coal-fired generation, unless fitted with
carbon capture. But carbon capture has not yet
become a commercially viable technology, so the
intention now is to rely on renewable and nuclear to
replace all coal in electricity generation.
The centre piece of the government’s plans is a new
nuclear power station at Hinkley Point in Somerset.
As we no longer have the capability to build nuclear
power stations ourselves, we have to engage
foreign companies to do so. Hinkley Point C, as it is
known, is to be built by the French company EDF
with a Chinese company. CGN, as junior partners.
Originally promised at a cost of £16bn for
completion by 2017, work eventually started in
2016 with the cost estimated at £19.6bn and
completion by 2025. In June 2017, EDF said the
cost might rise another £1.5bn with completion
later than 2025.
The other two power stations of this type being built
by EDF, one in France and the other in Finland, are
years late and greatly over budget.
BBC
FUTURE ELECTRICITY GENERATION
How many nuclear power stations actually get
built and by when is anyone’s guess. But we need
many new power stations urgently. And they
must be low or zero GHG emitting if we are to hit
our target of a reduction of 50% in emissions by
2027. Building gas power stations, which emit
only around half as much GHGs as coal for the
same amount of electricity generated, is a
possible interim measure. The first ship bringing
liquefied shale gas from the US arrived in
September 2016. See also P 24. One factor which
has helped is that the motor industry has
reduced emissions on cars and lorries more than
was expected.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
28
CHAPTER THREE
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
EDF Energy
NUCLEAR WASTE
There are two big problems with nuclear
power stations. The first is what to do
with the waste. Compared with the
waste from a coal mine, the volume is
small, but can stay dangerous for
thousands of years. Sweden and Finland
are building repositories deep under
stable rock. The UK would like to do the
same but has failed so far to find a
suitable location acceptable to the
people who live there, and is reluctant
to build in the face of local opposition.
In the meantime the waste is stored in
tanks like the one below.
Storage pond for used fuel at the Thermal Oxide
Reprocessing Plant at the UK's Sellafield site
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
International radioactive
waste hazard symbol
DECOMMISSIONING
The other big problem is decommissioning
at the end of a plant's life.
Britain developed nuclear bomb plants and
nuclear power stations in the 1940s and
1950s with little thought for how they
would be decommissioned at the end of
their lives. Having several different designs
complicated matters further, and
successive governments shelved the
problem. Decommissioning costs were
greatly underestimated. Now the problem
can be shelved no longer. A private
consortium, Nuclear Management Partners
(NMP), is currently contracted to
decommission Sellafield, the world’s first
nuclear power station opened by the Queen
in 1956, and 12 other sites at an annual
cost that is about two-thirds of the DECC
entire budget. Sellafield alone is now
estimated to cost £70 billion.
More recent nuclear power plants are far
better designed and will not present problems
of this magnitude when they are
decommissioned.
29
Ethanol Plant
BIOFUELS
A biofuel is one that is produced through
contemporary biological processes unlike
fossil fuels that involve extracting prehistoric
biological matter, eg coal.
Biofuels can come from plants, or indirectly
from agricultural, commercial, domestic, and/
or industrial wastes. Plant material is often
called biomass. This can be converted into
energy or fuel in three different ways: thermal
conversion, chemical conversion, and
biochemical conversion. Bioethanol is added
to gasoline in the USA and Brazil. It is usually
made from plants or wood waste.
In 2016 the UK government commissioned
the Royal Academy of Engineering to conduct
a study of different types of biofuel and
assess the pros and cons for each. The
Academy reported in July 2017. You can find
the full report at http://www.raeng.org.uk/
Here are some of the key points:
1. Some biofuels can help the UK to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions.
2. But the use of biofuels can result in
problems, such as knock-on emissions
due to land-use change, degradation of
land and increases in food prices.
3. Biofuels produced from algae aren’t a
viable option: their emissions are
currently higher than those from fossil
fuels and they are not economic to
produce.
The target in the UK currently remains at 4.75%,
far short of the 10% mandated by the EU for
2020.
The most high-profile, and controversial user of
biofuels in the UK is the Drax power station
which uses vast quantities of wood pellets
imported from North America. See P18
IS SHALE THE ANSwER?
(See also page 25)
The advantages of shale gas are
1. The estimated amounts under the UK are
vast and could provide energy security
for decades.
2. Using gas rather than coal reduces GHG
emissions by about half.
Objections to Fracking
Country dwellers,
especially the well-off,
object that fracking and
the associated
industrialisation will ruin
the natural beauty and
peace of the environment.
Organisations such as Greenpeace say that we
should be concentrating our efforts on zeroemitting renewables.
Both groups say that fracking is potentially
unsafe and can cause earth tremors and water
pollution. And it uses a great deal of water
which would be a problem in drought
conditions.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
30
CHAPTER THREE
OIL, COAL, GAS AND NUCLEAR
WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY PRICES
So that the generating companies can calculate
whether it is worth investing, the government
sets the price which distribution companies
must pay for the electricity they generate. This
is known as the strike price and varies
according to the method of generation. The
more desirable the method, the higher the
strike price.
For 2014 strike prices in £/MWh are: onshore
wind 95; offshore wind 155; tidal and wave
305; biomass 105; solar 124; coal and gas 55.
And for nuclear at Hinkley Point, which will be
in at least 10 years time, the strike price is
92.5 £/MWh.
Domestic electricity per kWh in London costs
17.75 euro cents while the average for all
European capitals is 20.35. For gas the figures
are 5.75 and 7.91. Labour promises a price
freeze for 20 months if elected while the
government is adjusting subsidies to
renewables that will, they say, reduce the
average annual bill by about £50. Household
bills have roughly doubled over the last 10
years, partly as a result of subsidies for
low carbon energy and household insulation.
Average household energy use has gone down
by about a quarter in this period.
(source The Economist)
GAS AND ELECTRICITY BILLS
ECONOMIC EFFECT OF HIGH
ENERGY PRICES
There is considerable concern that the EU,
including the UK, risk damaging industry
by having energy prices far higher than in
the USA.
Everyone agrees that energy prices are too high.
So you might be surprised to learn that they are
in fact well below the European average.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Photo: BBC
The government stops the companies from
simply buying the cheapest by laying down
priorities in the sources they must follow. For
example, they must buy all the electricity
generated by wind up to a certain amount. If
the wind drops, they make up the shortfall from
coal and gas. This doesn't reduce the overall
cost as windfarm operators are then paid
compensation.
31
CHAPTER FOUR:
UK GHG EMISSIONS
The main GHG is of course CO2. Different
fuels emit different amounts. The following
table, taken from MacKay pp 342, needs little
explanation.
How much different fuels
emit(grams of CO2 per kWh
of chemical energy)
natural gas
190
refinery gas
200
ethane
200
LPG
210
jet kerosene
240
petrol
240
gas/diesel oil
250
heavy fuel oil
260
naptha
260
coking coal
300
coal
300
petroleum coke
340
These are averages when burnt in the usual
ways, coal in power stations and petrol in
vehicle motors for example. Petrol doesn’t
vary much, although, of course, the amount
a car emits varies greatly depending on the
size and efficiency of the motor and the way it
is driven. Coal emissions vary between about
280 and 320 depending on the type of coal.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
32
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
OF CO 2 FROM FUEL
Average CO2 emissions per person in
tonnes per capita (source: International
Energy agency http://www.iea.org/) of
selected countries and regions for 2011
(the most recent available in February
2014)
4.50
9.95
0.93
38.17
17.43
USA
16.94
15.37
11.65
9.14
China
5.92
France
5.84
Iceland
5.81
Sweden
4.75
1.41
0.21
0.05
DRC
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
7.06
2.07
France generates 75% of its electricity
from nuclear but wants to reduce this
by a third as they feel they are too
dependent on only one source. Sweden
generates about 50% from hydro and 40%
nuclear.
Iceland is the only country in the world which
obtains 100% of its electricity and heat from
renewable sources. 87% of its electricity
comes from hydro-power, and the remaining
13% from geothermal power. Oil-powered
fossil fuel power stations are only used as
backups to the renewable sources.
Almost 100% of Iceland’s space heating and
water heating is obtained from geothermal
sources. But they use a great deal of petrol
and diesel for vehicles and their large
fishing fleet.
Over the next 20-30 years Iceland plans to
use geothermal electricity to split hydrogen
from water, and then to use hydrogen fuel
cells to power its vehicles and fishing trawlers.
This would make Iceland energy self-suffcient
and 100% powered by renewable energy.
However hydrogen powered buses and cars
currently cost up to four times as much as
petrol and diesel equivalents.
HAVE UK GHG EMISSIONS GONE DOWN?
Only slightly in the last three years, partly
because for every windfarm there has to be
equivalent coal or gas backup for when the
wind doesn't blow. But the government says
this will soon cease to be the case and we
still are on track to hit our target of a 50%
reduction from 1990 levels by 2027.
33
CHAPTER FIVE:
WHAT A UK ENERGY POLICY MUST ACHIEVE
EXERCISE
List what you think an energy policy must
aim to achieve, giving reasons if you can.
And then scroll down and compare your
answers with mine.
EXERCISE ANSWER: MY LIST
Here is my list of what an energy policy must
aim to achieve, and why.
1. that
the country has sufficient power for all
its needs now and in the future.
2. that
emissions of Greenhouse Gases
(GHGs) conform to treaty and overall
policy requirements.
3. that energy supplies are secure against:
a) C
limate variation. For example, the wind
drops and production of electricity from
both on and offshore windfarms falls
drastically. This happened in January
2010 and the country lost some 5% of
its electricity for about five days. Other
sources were able to increase production
by enough to compensate. But suppose
20% of electricity came from wind? I’ll say
more on this later.
b) T
echnical problems. For example, in
January 2010 the Norwegian undersea gas
extraction plant that feeds the pipeline
to the UK broke down. Fortunately it was
repaired within 48 hours and gas from
Russia, via the interconnector with the
Netherlands was able to make up the
loss... But suppose that Russian gas had
not been available.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
34
c) A supplier cutting off supplies
This became all too real a threat when
Russia annexed Crimea in March 2014 and
at the time of writing, early June, may
well annex parts of Ukraine as well. Some
countries bordering Russia get all or nearly
all their gas from Russia, including Ukraine
itself and Estonia, Latvia and Poland and are
at grave risk of energy blackmail. Already
Russia has nearly doubled the price it
charges Ukraine for gas. In the winter of
2008/2009 Russia cut off supplies to several
countries causing great hardship and many
deaths.
American shale gas has weakened the hold
of Russia over the rest of Europe, but it is
doubtful whether it could take the place of
Russian gas in time to avert major shortages.
The UK would also be affected as about
20% of our gas comes from Russia via the
network of pipelines shown below.
d) Terrorism.
Oil pipelines in many parts of the world
have been the target of terrorist
attacks. Many have been successful.
For example, in early July, 2007 a rash
of bomb explosions stopped the fow
of natural gas from PEMEX pipelines in
Mexico.
And, of course, all the above objectives
4.
must be achieved at minimum cost.
5. M
uch of the above can be summarised by
saying the policy must be economically,
socially and environmentally sustainable.
Two interconnectors, each of 500MW,
between Britain and Ireland opened in
2013. The intention was to put a large
number of windfarms in the sparsely
populated central areas of Ireland to
supply the UK with renewable energy
to help meet our European targets.
But opposition to these windfarms has
put this plan in jeopardy, and in April
2014 the Irish announced the plan had
collapsed.
A connector terminal. FT 20/09/2012
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
35
UK CARBON TARGETS
The main target is to reduce carbon
emissions by 80% by 2050 compared
with emissions for 1990. This is said to be
legally binding, but as no penalty for
failure can be specified (the government to
fine itself?) and none of today's
politicians are likely to be in office in 2050,
one could reasonably doubt
whether 'legally binding' means
anything. Furthermore, at any time,
Parliament can pass a law cancelling a
previous law.
A number of 'carbon budgets', each
covering five years, are specified as
stepping stones.The one for 2023 to 2027
aims to have reduced emissions by 50%
compared to 1990. In addition,there is an
EU commitment to generate 20% of
energy from renewable sources
by 2020. This looks achievable.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
36
CHAPTER FIVE
WHAT A UK ENERGY POLICY MUST ACHIEVE
It is frequently said that this means the
targets are ‘legally binding’. While it certainly
shows commitment to them by all the main
political parties, the phrase is really pretty
meaningless as was explained on page 35
above. At the same time, of course, energy
supplies must continue to be sufficient for
the country’s needs.
The rest of this module is about this
challenge and views on how it should be
met. We start by looking at the arithmetic
of hitting the targets for reduction in GHG
emissions.
THE ARITHMETIC OF REDUCING
GHG EMISSIONS
The government’s target is a reduction from
1990 emission levels of 50% by 2027 and
of 80% by 2050. The government proclaims
that GHG emissions have already been
reduced by 21% from 1990 levels.
But, AND IT IS A VERY BIG BUT INDEED, this
is almost entirely the result of the decline
in manufacturing in this country and the
importation of manufactured goods made
elsewhere. Official figures don’t take account
of the GHG emissions in making imported
goods.
This reduction of 21% is therefore
misleading. There is little scope for importing
even more of our manufactured goods,
even if it were desirable to do so, which it
almost certainly is not. This means that a
further reduction to hit the 2020 target of
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
34% compared with 1990 is going to be very
much harder to achieve. Furthermore, to hit
the target, the reduction from today’s levels
is not 13% but 16.5%. And this has to be
real, not done by the fudge of getting other
countries to emit on our behalf.
Moreover, one could argue, and indeed
developing countries do argue, that since
the GHGs are emitted to produce the goods
we import, we haven’t actually achieved any
reduction at all so far.
The next section looks at this question in
more detail.
37
Developing nations complain that advanced
countries, especially the USA and the UK,
import increasing amounts of manufactured
products and that the GHGs associated with
their production and transport should be
debited to the importing country. If we took
account of the energy needed to make the
products we in the UK import, how much
would it be?
Photo: Alto Images
Photo: Wikipedia
Various estimates have been made. See
MacKay pp322-4. The lowest is in a study
commissioned by the government, and is
60 kWh/d/p. So if we count the energy in
making all the things we import, the average
UK energy consumption rises from 125kWh/
d/p to at least 185kWh/d/p. Andsome
estimates are a good deal higher.
GHGs IN MAKING OUR IMPORTED
GOODS
And the GHG emissions for which we are
responsible rise as well, although the exact
amount depends on the manufacturing
processes and the transport costs involved.
The government estimate is that the UK
carbon footprint is 11 tons CO2 equivalent
(CO2e) per year per person. If the emissions
in producing our net imports are taken into
account, the figure rises to 17.2tons CO2e
per year per person. You can see why the
developing nations are so concerned!
But world atmospheric CO2e is usually given
as parts per million by volume, or ppmv, with
450ppmv as the level below which the world
must keep if environmental disaster is to be
avoided. (There are, of course, no certainties
about this figure, but it is the one accepted
by the developed nations). So if the UK is
Photo: Image Source
Photos
ENERGY IN IMPORTED GOODS
70% of the world’s toys are made in China
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
38
CHAPTER FIVE
WHAT A UK ENERGY POLICY MUST ACHIEVE
responsible for 17.2 tons per person per
year, what does that do to atmospheric CO2e
in ppmv?
In Module One, quoting MacKay (Who else?),
I stated that the world currently emits an
estimated 23 gigatons (Gt) of CO2e, about
half of which is absorbed by the oceans,
plants etc with the remaining half causing
the proportion in the atmosphere to increase
by about 1.5ppmv.
To translate the UK’s 17.2 tons per person
per year to the total for the whole country,
we simply multiply by 60,000,000, the
approximate population, to get the UK total
of one Gt per year. This is one 23rd of the
emissions for the whole world. But there are
about 7 billion people in the world. So we
have about 0.9% of the world’s population
but are responsible for about 4.3% of global
emissions.
Photo: Huffington Post
Even the government's figures, which omit
the effect of imported stuff, have our share
of global emissions at 2.75%(Which,
incidentally, they proclaim as showing we are
on course to meet our Kyoto commitments.
This is true but is almost entirely the result of
the shift from making our own goods to
importing them).
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
The EU ETS
All EU states, are in the EU Emission
Trading Scheme, the first and biggest
ETS in the world. Covering the biggest
emitters, ‘allowances’ to emit CO2 were
initially given to firms and then traded.
All nations cheated and were allocated far
more than they needed. Consequently,
the price is far too low and the scheme
has failed to curb carbon emissions. The
UK government tried to bolster the
scheme by introducing in 2013 a carbon
tax to ensure UK firms paid at least £18 a
tonne of CO2 if the ETS price fell below
this figure. According to The Economist
for March 22, 2014 this has merely
disadvantaged UK manufacturers without
having any effect on carbon emissions
overall. Furthermore, to the immense
annoyance of green groups, the tax
receipts have not been used for green
projects. See also Guide Two, page 35.
So far, the scheme has not achieved
much.
The official website http://ec.europa.eu/
clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm has a
clear explanation.
39
CHAPTER SIX:
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
REDUCING OUR CARBON
FOOTPRINTS
The aim is to ensure that demand for energy
is met from sources that cause a reduction in
GHG emissions sufficient to meet the target of
a total reduction from 1990 levels of 34% by
2020 and 80% by 2050.
The carbon footprint is a measurement of all
greenhouse gases we individually produce
and has units of tonnes (or kg) of carbon
dioxide equivalent.
This is a great deal easier to say than to do.
Any reduction in demand will help.
Clearly we must all reduce our carbon
footprints.
EXERCISE
Define your carbon footprint. Then
compare your attempt with the following...
WHAT IS A CARBON FOOTPRINT?
Carbon Footprint Ltd is a leading carbon
management consultancy. The rest of this
section is copied from their website.
A carbon footprint is a measure of the impact
our activities have on the environment, and
in particular climate change. It relates to the
amount of greenhouse gases produced in our
day-to-day lives through burning fossil fuels
for electricity, heating and transportation etc.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
40
A carbon footprint is made up of the sum
of two parts, the primary footprint (shown
by the green slices of the pie chart) and the
secondary footprint (shown as the yellow
slices).
1. The
primary footprint is a measure of our
direct emissions of CO2 from the burning
of fossil fuels including domestic energy
consumption and transportation (e.g.
car and plane). We have direct control of
these.
2. T
he secondary footprint is a measure
of the indirect CO2 emissions from the
whole lifecycle of products we use - those
associated with their manufacture and
eventual breakdown. To put it very simply
– the more we buy the more emissions will
be caused on our behalf.
EASY WAYS TO REDUCE YOUR
CARBON FOOTPRINT
EXERCISE
List all the ways you can think of for
reducing your carbon footprint, and then
for each guess by how many kWh/d
this would reduce your daily energy
consumption.
EXERCISE ANSWER
MacKay does this on pages 229 and
230. Remember, the average energy
consumption per person per day is 125kWh.
My consumption, and I guess yours, is likely
to be much more than this. The rest of this
section is from Professor MacKay’s text.
share of public services
12%
financial services
3%
Recreation & leisure
14%
House buildings & furnishings
9%
home gas, oil & coal
15%
home - electricity
12%
private transport
10%
public transport
3%
car manufacture & delivery
food & drink
Holiday flights
7%
5%
clothes &
6%
personal effects
4%
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
41
Individual action
People sometimes ask me “What should I do?”
Table 29.3 indicates eight simple personal
actions I’d recommend, and a very rough
indication of the savings associated with each
action. Terms and conditions apply. Your
savings will depend on your starting point. The
numbers in table 29.3 assume the starting
point of an above-average consumer.
Table 29.3...
SIMPLE ACTION
POSSIBLE
SAVING
Put on a woolly jumper and turn down your heating’s thermostat (to 15
or 17◦C, say). Put individual thermostats on all radiators. Make sure the
heating’s off when no-one’s at home. Do the same at work
20 kWh/d
Read all your meters (gas, electricity, water) every week, and identify
easy changes to reduce consumption (e.g. switching things off).
Compare competitively with a friend. Read the meters at your place
of work too, creating a perpetual live energy audit
4k Wh/d
Stop flying
35 kWh/d
Drive less, drive more slowly, drive more gently, carpool,
use an electric car, join a car club, cycle, walk, use trains and buses
20 kWh/d
Keep using old gadgets (e.g. computers) don’t replace them early
4 kWh/d
Change lights to fluorescent or LED
4 kWh/d
Don’t buy clutter. Avoid packaging
20 kWh/d
Eat vegetarian, six days out of seven
10 kWh/d
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
42
CHAPTER SIX
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
HARDER WAYS TO REDUCE YOUR
CARBON FOOTPRINT
Finally, Table 29.5 shows a few runners-up:
some simple actions with small savings.
On p230 MacKay makes some suggestions
that are mainly for householders. Here they
are, although one is rather tongue-in-cheek.
Whereas the above actions are easy to
implement, the ones in table 29.4 take a bit
more planning, determination, and money.
Table 29.4...
Table 29.5...
SIMPLE ACTION
POSSIBLE
SAVING
Eliminate draughts
50 kWh/d
Double glazing
10 kWh/d
Improve wall, roof, and
floor insulation
10 kWh/d
Solar hot water panels
8 kWh/d
Photovoltaic panels
5 kWh/d
Knock down old building
and replace by new
35 kWh/d
Replace fossil-fuel heating
by ground-source or airsource heat pumps
20 kWh/d
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
ACTION
POSSIBLE
SAVING
Wash laundry in cold water
0.5 kWh/d
Stop using a tumble-dryer;
use a clothes-line or airing
cupboard
0.5 kWh/d
43
IS A BIG REDUCTION IN ENERGY
CONSUMPTION REALISTIC?
Yes. As was demonstrated by another
advanced country three years ago. On
March 11, 2011 a large earthquake in the
sea near Japan created a huge wave or
tsunami. Towns were swamped, killing over
20,000. Nuclear power plants at Fukushima
were inundated and the country suddenly
lost 20% of its electricity. Disaster? Not
entirely, as this edited report from the
Financial Times for August 8, 2011 shows.
'One of the reasons its economy has
been able to soldier on is that there is
a massive energy-saving drive. Office
air-conditioners are not blasting at their
normal freezing-cold temperatures.
Companies have even reinvented the
weekend. Toyota’s working week now
runs from Sunday to Wednesday, helping
to spread electricity usage more evenly
across the seven-day cycle.’
THE PAPER PARADOX
For years we have been told not to
waste paper as the more paper we use
the more trees will be cut down. But
Professor Richard Muller, the Californian
astrophysicist turned climate scientist,
states in his (strongly recommended)
book Energy for Future Presidents that
we have all failed to follow through on
the logic and are consequently doing the
exact opposite of what we should be in
order to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere.
The trees that supply the paper industry
worldwide are grown commercially. The
more demand there is for paper, the
more trees will be planted. So the more
we waste paper, the more trees there
will be. And equally, the more wood we
use. Can this be true?
Timber harvesting, Kielder, UK
Wikipedia
11 March 2011 The wave from a tsunami crashes
over a street in Miyako City, Iwate Prefecture.
The Telegraph
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
44
CHAPTER SIX
MEETING THE CHALLENGE
SOME RADICAL SUGGESTIONS
Here are some that occur to me. But you
may well think of others. If so, I’d be very
interested to know what they are. Please send
them to me, David Terry, at:
[email protected]
•
Change
work and school times so that,
as in Tokyo, energy use is spread more
evenly across the day.
•
Big
increase in working at home
– encouraged by a huge increase in the
tax on petrol and diesel so that the price
rises enough to greatly reduce car travel.
•
Adjust
clock times in winter to
maximise the use of daylight –
this probably means summertime
continues through the winter, at any
rate in England. Scotland may choose to
operate differently.
•
Large
tax on patio heaters so as to greatly
reduce their use (I was tempted to say
ban their use, but we live in a democracy).
CARBON FOOTPRINT, FOOD MILES
Food miles are a way of attempting to
measure how far food has travelled before it
reaches the consumer and hence the quantity
of GHG emissions that should be attached to
particular foods. It includes getting foods to
you, but also getting waste foods away from
you, and to the landfill!
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
At first glance, this is a no-brainer. We should
all eat food that is grown locally and not, for
example, green beans flown in from Kenya.
But it is not as simple as that. Suppose the
locally grown food is produced by workers
who drive to the farm, use tractors and
specialised machinery while there, and that
much of their produce is grown in heated
greenhouses, while the Kenyan farm worker
walks to work and uses no machinery at all.
Furthermore, if we stop buying the Kenyan
farmer’s green beans, he and his family may
well starve. This illustrates the fact that there
must be a moral dimension to our actions.
45
CHAPTER SEVEN:
MEETING DEMAND WITH REDUCED
GHG EMISSIONS
The previous pages in this part considered
what we can do individually to reduce our
energy consumption. But that, of course, can
only be a part of the equation. The other part
must be to meet this reduced demand with
near zero GHG emissions. This is mainly a
matter for government.
There is no right answer to this; anything
is a pure guess. Only time will tell. But for
the rest of this module, I’ll work on the
assumption that average energy consumption
can be reduced from its current 125kWh/p/d
to 70kWh/d/p.
MacKay on page 22 gives the chart below to
illustrate the challenge.
In the next sections, I’ll look at some of the
means of producing and using GHG-free
energy our government might move towards.
Some key forms of consumption will be:
CARBON CAPTURE AND STORAGE (CCS)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Coal is much the worst emitter of GHGs. But
the government does not intend to stop using
coal for power stations. Instead it says they
must drastically reduce emissions of CO 2 by
fitting carbon capture and storage systems.
Transport – cars, planes, freight
Heating and cooling
Lighting
Information systems and other gadgets
Food
Manufacturing
Types of low-carbon energy production:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Wind
Solar – photovoltaic’s, thermal, biomass
Hydroelectric
Wave
Tide
Geothermal
Nuclear? (with a questionmark because it’s
not clear whether nuclear power counts as
‘sustainable’
In the exercise on p40, what did you think
average energy consumption might be
reduced to from the present 125kWh/d/p?
CCS consists of capturing most of the CO 2
emitted, compressing it to make it liquid and
then burying the liquid CO2 somewhere where it
cannot escape. Experts say there are many
suitable burial sites in the UK, including the
caverns under the North Sea left after oil and gas
has been extracted. While this technology
is still in the development stage, physics shows
that roughly a quarter of such a power station's
output would be needed to power a CCS system.
Most of this is used in squishing the gas into
liquid form and is physically impossible to avoid.
(Mackay p157).
So for any given amount of power we wish to
generate by coal, we shall need a third more
power to do it. And that means importing more
coal, which itself leads to more CO 2 emissions.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
46
CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING DEMAND WITH REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS
The UK started trying to fund carbon capture
projects in 2007, but initial efforts collapsed in
2011 after the winner of an earlier carbon capture
competition, a consortium led by Scottish Power
that planned to build the system at the Longannet
power station in Scotland, could not agree funding
terms with the government.
HOW IT WORKS
The second, interestingly, is for a gas-fired
power station. In February 2014 the Energy
Secretary, Edward Davey, signed a deal to
help Royal Dutch Shell build a carbon capture
and storage scheme at a gas-fired power
plant owned by Scottish and Southern Energy
near Peterhead in Aberdeenshire. But he
added that it would be unlikely to go ahead
if Scotland voted for independence in
September.
Peterhead
Power
Station
Photo DECC
DECC website
UK PROJECTS
The government has now announced two CCS
schemes. The contract for the first, signed in
December 2013, is at Drax in Yorkshire where
tens of millions of pounds have been promised to
fund engineering, planning and financial work for
a new coal-fired power plant with 2m tonnes of
carbon dioxide emissions each year captured and
piped by National Grid into a depleted North Sea
gas field. If the plant is eventually built, Drax
would be entitled to subsidies. Drax, our biggest
electricity generator, generates about 7% of total
UK consumption. It is also where half the plant is
being converted to using biomass. (See p 18)
Drawing of proposed new
plant at Drax http://www.
whiteroseccs.co.uk/
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
The agreement signed for the Peterhead and
Yorkshire projects will allow the scheme’s
backers to conduct detailed engineering and
planning work ahead of a final investment
decision next year. Both schemes are being
funded from a £100m pot as part of the UK’s
troubled efforts to become a world leader in
carbon capture technology.
CCS WORLDWIDE
Governments around the world have made
similar commitments to carbon capture
projects on power stations, but the high cost
of such schemes has put a brake on many. A
Canadian utility was expected to finish a
carbon capture system at a coal-fired power
station in Saskatchewan and a US scheme
was scheduled for completion in 2014. The EU
has fallen well behind on carbon capture
projects as the eurozone crisis crimped efforts
such as a £1bn competition to fund suitable
projects in the UK.
(source Financial Times)
47
In a power station heat goes up the cooling
towers, chimneys or into the sea. Instead,
why not use this heat to heat buildings? This
is what combined heat and power is. And to
get over the problem of most buildings being
far from a power station, have lots of little
ones instead of a few large ones.
MacKay (p145) however believes this would
be a mistake, and that heat pumps are a
much better way.
HEAT PUMPS
MacKay p146 and 147 describes them as
follows:
Heat pumps are back-to-front
refrigerators. Feel the back of your
refrigerator: it’s warm. A refrigerator
moves heat from one place (its inside) to
another (its back panel). So one way to
heat a building is to turn a refrigerator
inside-out – put the inside of the
refrigerator in the garden, thus cooling
the garden down; and leave the back
panel of the refrigerator in your kitchen,
thus warming the house up.
What isn’t obvious about this whacky
idea is that it is a really efficient way to
warm your house. For every kilowatt of
power drawn from the electricity grid,
the back-to-front refrigerator can pump
three kilowatts of heat from the garden,
so that a total of four kilowatts of heat
gets into your house. So heat pumps
are roughly four times as efficient as a
standard electrical bar-fire. Whereas the
bar-fire’s efficiency is 100%, the heat
pump’s is 400%.
They are, he says, widely used in continental
Europe but strangely rare in the UK. A
friend in New Zealand tells me they are
commonplace there and he has two in his
house. He likes them, but another friend who
was living there until recently doesn’t,
saying they are noisy and drafty. MacKay
strongly advocates their use. But I
understand that not everyone agrees with
his calculations, and there are problems in
densely populated urban areas where there is
not enough ground or ambient air per house.
Photo: www.which.co.uk/
COMBINED HEAT AND POWER
Diagram of a
ground-source heat
pump by which?
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
48
CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING DEMAND WITH REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS
ELECTRIC CARS
The great problem with electric cars is the
battery. Range is limited to little over 100 miles
and charging at home can take nine hours.
(See also Guide Two, p68) But in recent years
battery technology has advanced dramatically.
After initial reluctance, all the major
manufacturers are now already selling electric
cars, or planning to do so within a year or two.
And far from being slow, the Tesla car can rival
the most powerful Ferrari. Even Jeremy
Clarkson was impressed.
Helped by a government grant, Nissan are now
producing the electric Leaf 9 (pictured) in
Sunderland.
The Nissan Leaf Electric: £23,630 or £229 a month,
including Government subsidy of £5,000 (from Nissan
Retail advert)
Current models have a range of only a little
more than 100 miles, while conventional cars
have a range of over 300 miles. And if their
range improves and electric cars become
popular, a network of battery-exchange or rapid
recharging stations will need to be set up.
Furthermore, the national electricity grid will
need to be upgraded to cope with the increased
current.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
THE NEW MORGAN ELECTRIC
SPORTS CAR
The following is from an announcement by
Morgan Cars (the Malvern Link company) in
May 2016.
The Morgan EV3 will be the first production
EV to be built by the company.
• Production to start in Q4 of 2016
• Pricing and performance figures will be
comparable to the petrol 3 Wheeler
• Operational range of 150 miles
• Launch coincides with the
announcement that a consortium led by
Morgan will receive government funding
towards advanced propulsion
The Morgan EV3 today makes its world debut at
the 2016 Geneva Motor Show. The EV3 looks at
the world of zero emissions motoring from an
entirely different perspective, what if an allelectric vehicle was bespoke, hand crafted and
exhilarating to drive? The EV3 embraces new
technology, delivers responsible driving
excitement and continues to celebrate
traditional British craftsmanship. Lightweight
agility is complemented by performance figures
that challenge those of the petrol version.
0-62mph takes less than 9 seconds and a top
speed in excess of 90mph.
For more information, go to
www.morgan-motor.co.uk
49
HYBRID CARS
Most drivers are uneasy about a range
of only 100 miles and worryabout being
stranded. One solution to this will be to
have sat nav that directs you to the
nearest charging station when the battery
is running low. But that will only work
when there is a network of charging
stations. So, at the moment, most electric
cars are hybrids with a back up petrol
engine. But by adding to the weight this
negates part of the advantage of an
electric car. The best known is the Toyota
Prius, pictured below.
Toyota Prius hybrid ...141 (110 from the
exhaust; 31 in refining the fuel)
Nissan Leaf electric …114 (zero from the
exhaust; 114 in generating the electricity)
The figure for the same Nissan Leaf is
highest in China at 182 and lowest for
France at mere 20, reflecting the fact that
China generates most of its electricity from
coal while in France it mostly comes from
nuclear. The figure for Iceland would be
zero as all their electricity comes from
hydroelectric (70%) and geothermal
(30%). (Wikipedia)
You can find the calculations and results at
http://www.theicct.org/sites/default/files/
publications/ICCT_CalculatingEdriveGHG_
082012_0.pdf
RAIL ELECTRIFICATION
Photo from
http://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/prius
HOW MUCH CO2 ARE ELECTRIC
CARS RESPONSIBLE FOR?
There is none from the car itself (which
means it doesn't pollute city centres) but
there is from the power station which
generates the electricity in the grid. Only
if all the electricity in the grid came from non
carbon-emitting power – wind, water,
nuclear etc – would the answer be zero.
An independent organisation called the
International Council on Clean
Transportation has estimated the CO2
emissions, in gm CO2/km for various
electric cars for different countries, using
projected figures for 2015. The figures
for the UK are:
Average medium-sized petrol family car …
186 (155 from the exhaust; 31 in refining
the fuel)
Having the oldest railway network in the
world means that nearly all our lines
were constructed in Victorian times and
the greatest speed that can be attained
anywhere is 125 mph, except for the
new line from London to the Channel
Tunnel for which the maximum is 186
mph, whereas new lines can allow
speeds of over 220 mph.
Electric trains emit up to 35% less carbon
a diesel train. With zero emissions at the
point of use, they improve air quality in
pollution hot spots such as city centres
and main line stations. An added bonus is
that they are quieter than diesels and
virtually silent when waiting at stations.
Photo: www.tgv.co.uk/
Photo:
Railway Gazette
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
50
CHAPTER SEVEN
MEETING DEMAND WITH REDUCED GHG EMISSIONS
The Government plans to electrify more
key routes but, of course, the great
programme is HS2.
HS2
This is by a large margin the most
ambitious surface rail* scheme for at
least a century. Unlike plans to upgrade
existing routes by electrifying them, HS2
is a plan to build a network of completely
new lines on which trains could travel at
up to 220 mph.
CYCLING IN CITIES
The least carbon emitting form of city transport
is, of course, cycling. More and more are cycling,
but we have a long way to go before our cities
are as cycle friendly as some in other countries.
When snow falls in Copenhagen, miniature
snow ploughs are out clearing the cycle lanes
sooner than the road network.
Cycling is such an ingrained
part of Danish culture that
we hardly think about it.
Most children can cycle by
the time they start school
Official Danish Website
(* Costing only about a third of HS2,
London Crossrail due to be partly
completed in 2015 is currently Europe's
largest construction project.)
Photo:
www.denmark.dk/en/green
Berlin is enjoying a cycling boom, with miles
of new cycle paths and more than half a
million bike journeys made every day - but
controversially, a helmet is rarely seen.
Cycling became more dangerous last
year, when the rate of cyclists killed
and seriously injured rose sharply,
offcial fgures showed today.
The Times September 2012
Although supported by all three main political
parties, there is vociferous opposition from
many. The two main objections are, first, that
it will destroy or severely damage many areas
of outstanding natural beauty and, second,
that the money - £45 billion – would be better
spent improving the existing network.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
But Britain’s best
known city cyclist
doesn’t always set
a good example of
safe cycling.
Photo: www.canterbury.ac.uk/projects/
sustainable-development/
51
CHAPTER EIGHT:
CAN WE LIVE ON NON-EMITTING SOURCES ALONE?
Ultimately, the aim is to live on non-emitting
sources alone. Is this possible?
MacKay on page 216 makes some estimates.
He admits that they are necessarily pretty
rough. But as you will appreciate if you look
at his book (free on-line), they are based on
physics and arithmetic, not on unquantified
hope as all too many are. Here is a simplified
version of this table...
Suppose that by 2050 average energy
consumption falls to 70kWh/d/p. Could this
amount of energy be provided by non GHG
emitting sources?
ROUGH COST
£bn
CAPACITY GW
AVERAGE POWER
DELIVERED
kWh/d/p
52 onshore wind
farms: 5200km2
35
27
4.2
29 offshore wind
farms:
2900km2
29
36
3.5
Photovoltaic
farms: 1000km2
48
190
2
Solar hot
water panels: 1m2
of roof-mounted
panel per person
2.5
72
Waste incinerators:
100 new 30MW
incinerators
3
8.5
1
1.1
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
52
ROUGH COST
£bn
CAPACITY GW
Heat pumps
AVERAGE POWER
DELIVERED
kWh/d/p
210
60
12
1.9
6
0.3
8
15
0.8
1.75
2.6
0.7
Tidal stream:
15,000 turbines,
2000km2
18
21
2.2
Nuclear power:
40 stations
45
60
16
Clean coal 8GW
8
16
3
40
340
16
Biofuels:
30,000km2
(not estimated)
2
Wood/Miscanthus:
31,000km2
(not estimated)
5
Wave farms
130km of sea
Severn barrage:
550km2
Tidal lagoons:
800km2
Solar power in
deserts 2700km2
Total
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
69.8
53
As you see, professor MacKay got to just
under 70kWh/d/p only by including nuclear
and clean coal which are not strictly
renewables, although they do not emit much
GHG, and by assuming we could persuade
a desert country to allow 2700km2 to be
covered with photovoltaic panels connected
to a cable capable of transmitting this much
power to the UK. The physics works, but the
politics would be, to say the least, tricky and
the cost considerable. (I think the country
Mackay had in mind was Libya!!!).
Without these dubious sources, the total from
renewable sources falls by about a half.
MEETING THE 2050 TARGET
On page 204, MacKay summarises the
challenge the government faces in meeting
its target of 80% reduction by 2050 with
the chart on the right. As you can see, he
assumes that by 2050 all transport will be
electrified, that there will be considerable
efficiency savings in transport and home
heating, and that the present losses in
conversion to electricity will be eliminated.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
54
CHAPTER EIGHT
CAN WE LIVE ON NON-EMITTING SOURCES ALONE?
MAP OF BRITAIN WITH RENEWABLES
In his ten-page synopsis, which I strongly recommend
down-loading and printing, MacKay gives five possible
energy plans for the UK which do add up, and then a sixth
which includes every possible low-carbon energy source
and a map showing the implications (shown below):
A plan that adds up, for Scotland, England,
and Wales. The grey-green squares are
windfarms. Each is 100km 2 in size and
is shown to scale. The red lines in the sea
are wave farms, shown to scale. Lightblue lightning-shaped polygons: solar
photovoltaic farms-20km2 each, shown
to scale. Blue sharp-cornered polygons
in the sea: tide farms. Blue blobs in
the sea (Blackpool and the Wash): tidal
lagoons. Light-green land areas: woods
and short-rotation coppices (to scale).
Yellow-green areas: biofuel (to scale).
Small blue triangles: waste incineration
plants (not to scale). Big brown diamonds:
clean coal power stations, with co-firing of
biomass, and carbon capture and storage
(not to scale). Purple dots: nuclear power
stations (not to scale) – 3.3GW average
production at each of 12 sites. Yellow
hexagons across the channel: concentrating
solar power facilities in remote deserts
(to scale, 335km2 each). The pink wiggly
line in France represents new HVDC lines,
2000km long, conveying 40GW from remote
deserts to the UK. Yellow stars in Scotland:
new pumped storage facilities. Red stars:
existing pumped storage facilities. Blue
dots: solar panels for hot water on all roofs.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
55
CHAPTER NINE:
PROS AND CONS OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY
SOURCES FOR THE UK
In this chapter I consider some possible
sources of energy and what I see to be the
pros and cons of each.
You may well not agree with aspects of my
assessment. But I hope I shall have helped
you follow the debate on energy and climate
change.
Petrol and diesel, derived from oil, are still far
and away the most convenient way to power
road vehicles, and likely to remain so for many
years to come. Although vehicles are becoming
much more effcient, there seems to be no way
of signifcantly reducing the GHG emissions
associated with burning a given quantity.
The oil industry dominates the world and is
highly efficient at getting fuel to service
stations worldwide. Replacing petrol and diesel
vehicles with electric ones is unlikely to be
done at all quickly, despite governments
in all developed countries using taxation and
subsidies to encourage switching.
Photo: Wikipedia
So here goes...
OIL
1,2) conventional fixed platforms; 3) compliant tower; 4,5) vertically moored tension leg and
mini-tension leg platform; 6) Spar; 7,8) Semi-submersibles; 9) Floating production,
storage,and offloading facility; 10) sub-sea completion and tie-back to host facility.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
56
Oil is not merely a major source of GHG
emissions; getting it can cost lives and if
spilled, destructive pollution can ensue. On
April 20, 2010, an explosion ripped through
the Deepwater Horizon offshore oil drilling rig
in the Gulf of Mexico, killing 11 workers and
injuring 17 others. Oil poured out for four
months causing extensive damage to wildlife,
and great loss of income to the fishing
and tourism industries. The cost to BP, the
owners, runs to billions of pounds. But the
worst accident in the world to date was on
the Piper Alpha oilrig 120 miles north east of
Aberdeen.
Originally an oilrig, it was later converted to
gas production, with catastrophic results.
Leaking gas ignited late in the evening of 6
July 1988, causing a series of explosions and
a devastating blaze. 167 of the 226 men on
board perished. Many were trapped in their
cabins, others leapt 100ft into the sea. Many
of those who survived jumping into the sea
were burned to death by the intense heat.
This was so great that no ship or helicopter
could get near. One consequence is that the
North Sea now has the most stringent safety
requirements in the world.
Nevertheless, accidents can still happen. One
did in mid August 2011 when an underwater
pipeline from a North Sea platform operated
by Royal Dutch Shell sprang a leak. While
small compared with the Gulf of Mexico
disaster of April 2010, it was the biggest spill
in UK waters for the past decade.
COAL
As we have seen, coal is the worst emitter of
GHGs of all. Coal is used to produce nearly
a fifth of our electricity. The Conservative/
Liberal Democrat coalition government, like
the previous Labour government, has said that
any new coal power stations must be Carbon
Capture and Storage (CCS). But while the
physics works, no one has yet used the
technique commercially.
GAS
Natural gas has several plus factors. There
is no shortage of it worldwide and with the
advent of LNG no one country can hold us to
ransom. We have considerable amounts of it
under the North Sea plus a dedicated pipeline
from a Norwegian field. So supplies of gas are
very secure.
Photo: Daily Mail
Furthermore, unlike oil, gas leakage on its
own does not cause environmental disaster.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Piper Alpha, then
the biggest rig in
the world, on fire
July 6, 1988
But its exploitation is dangerous and many
lives have been lost piping it from under the
sea.
57
And there have been explosions in gas
pipelines. Which is why the inhabitants of
Corse Lawn in Gloucestershire campaigned,
unsuccessfully, against the LNG pipeline from
Milford Haven joining the UK network near
their village.
Lastly, gas GHG emissions are only two
thirds of those from coal in producing the
same amount of electricity. So we could
immediately reduce our GHG emissions
by switching power stations from coal to
gas. Unless, that is, CCS proves capable of
reducing coal emissions to near zero.
So there is an argument for increasing gas
usage in the medium term, say until 2025.
After that it will need to be phased out along
with other fossil fuels and replaced by non CO 2
emitting sources if we are to meet our target of
reducing emissions compared with 1990 by
50% by 2017 and 80% by 2050.
NUCLEAR
In the 2010 and 2015 general elections, both
Labour and the Conservatives proposed building
more nuclear power stations, while the Lib
Dems, Greens and most of the environmental
pressure groups were wholly against.
The first, to provide 7% of our electricity, is to be
Hinkley Point in Somerset. Originally scheduled to
be completed by 2017, construction had still not
started by June 2015. (See also pp 27,28)
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
58
CHAPTER NINE
PROS & CONS
OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY SOURCES FOR THE UK?
The Japanese nuclear disaster has led to much
further questioning worldwide on the wisdom
of building more nuclear power stations.
Arguments for nuclear include:
1. Power stations emit virtually no GHGs.
2. The
fuel, uranium, comes from stable
countries, notably Australia and Canada.
3. The
technology is well proven. The world’s
first nuclear power station opened in the
UK in 1956, and there are now about 430
worldwide. The UK currently generates
18% of its electricity by nuclear.
4. In
terms of deaths, it is far safer than oil,
gas or coal, even after Fukushima.
5. While
some of the waste lasts for
thousands of years, quantities are small.
6. Arguments against include:
- S
ome of the waste remains highly
dangerous for thousands of years and
we cannot be certain that any storage
system will be secure for that long. It is
immoral to bequeath the waste problem
to future generations.
- D
eaths may be rare, so far, but there
is always the potential for a terrible
accident. What if one was severely
damaged by an earthquake as in Japan?
Or bombed as an act of war?
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
- T
he zero GHG emission assertion
is spurious. What about all the
GHGs involved in building and later
decommissioning them? If this is taken
into account, nuclear is little less GHG
polluting than coal, gas or oil.
- I n any case, nuclear power stations take
far too long to build to be ready by 2017.
- T
hey are prohibitively expensive if all
costs, including decommissioning are
taken into account.
- T
here is nothing to stop a country, such
as Iran, from using nuclear power station
construction as a cloak for developing
nuclear weapons.
For more on the physics and arithmetic, go to
MacKay (pp161 to 176).
59
Drawing on this chapter, I believe that
arguments in favour 1 to 4 are correct, but so
are arguments against 1, 2 and 6. Arguments
against 3 and 4 are considered by MacKay
and shown to be false.
The cost argument is bedevilled by the
distortion of subsidies. Currently, renewables
are much more subsidised. But given that
the fuel for renewables is free, this may not
to be so in the future. In assessing how long
it takes to build a nuclear power station, is
the start point when they are first proposed
or when construction actually begins? The
average of the latter seems to be about five
years, but getting planning approval in this
country has taken up to a further ten years.
In a democracy, it is important not to ride
roughshod over objections without giving
them detailed consideration.
WIND
On-shore wind is a technology that has
been developed over at least 30 years and
undoubtedly works.
Building on-shore windfarms is relatively
straightforward. Based on the figures in
MacKay pp203-221 and reproduced on pages
42 and 43 above, I calculate that covering
the windiest 2% of the UK with windfarms
would generate about 4.2 kWh/d/p out of the
70kWh/d/p that we will need. Fairly obviously,
nothing like as much again would be
generated by covering the next windiest 2%
with windfarms. There are, of course, two
major objections. The first is that while wind
is free, what happens when the wind drops?
In view of developments in Iran, argument
number 6 against has force. Moreover, it
seems that the UK built the world’s first
nuclear power station partly to hide its
development of a hydrogen bomb.
On the other hand, there are currently about
440 functioning nuclear power stations
worldwide and many countries are planning to
build more, including the USA and India.
A final point on nuclear waste. Only about 3%
is highly radioactive. The amounts are relatively
small, but the problem considerable. Maybe a
way of making it harmless will be found.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
60
CHAPTER NINE
PROS & CONS
OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY SOURCES FOR THE UK?
Proponents of wind say that this seldom
happens for the whole of the UK at the same
time, and that if we were part of a Europewide network it would be even less likely.
There are two ways of coping with a lull. One,
already in use in the UK, is pumped storage.
At Dinorweg in Wales, there are two lakes,
one high up a mountain, the other 500m
further down. The upper lake is kept full
except when there is a lull when, within 12
seconds, it can discharge into the lower one
generating a power of 1.7GW for 5 hours.
When electric cars are commonplace, there
is an even better solution. If, say, 30 million
batteries are on charge, when there is a lull
they can be made to go the other way and
discharge into the mains. Presumably, if the
lull lasted too long, cars would all come to a
halt. But that would probably be only after
several days.
The second objection is that covering all
our mountain ridges with windmills would
severely damage the natural beauty of our
countryside.
Off-shore windfarms are much less
susceptible to lulls and don’t disfigure the
landscape but are much more expensive both
to build and to maintain. Each one needs to
be on a submerged tower twice the height
of Nelson’s Column. There are considerable
technical problems not only with building,
installing and maintaining but also with
bringing the generated electricity ashore. As
a result, some think it is a great mistake to
invest heavily in off-shore windfarms.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
The UK already has some 340 off-shore
turbines in relatively shallow water and
plans to invest a vast sum of money, £72
billion, in more. The building of very large
off-shore windfarm is proceeding apace and
on September 24, 2010 the government
announced the opening of the world’s largest
offshore windfarm with 100 wind turbines
capable of supplying enough electricity for
(wait for it!-see page 10, Misleading Units)
200,000 homes a year.
WAVE
Politicians, most of whom are scientifically
ignorant, often suppose there is far more
energy in waves than there actually is.
Looking at Atlantic breakers on a stormy
day, one gets the impression of vast
amounts of water rushing towards one.
This is an illusion. Just like a Mexican wave
at a football match, where the impression
of 80,000 people rushing towards one is
created but in fact each person is merely
standing up and sitting down, the water in
a wave is only going up and down. There is
energy that can be tapped, but nothing like
as much as one might think.
A sort of metal snake is used to capture
wave energy. It works but, as with off-shore
windfarms, getting the generated electricity
ashore is a problem. Furthermore, a wave
is largely destroyed by the snake and does
not regenerate itself to be used again. And,
as with off-shore windfarms, shipping lanes
have to be provided.
61
HYDRO
The Scottish Hydro Electric Visitor Centre at
Pitlochry includes in its excellent information
rooms a board explaining that Scotland doesn’t
have mountains that are quite high enough or
lakes quite deep enough, compared with for
example Canada, to enable hydro to be the
major provider of electricity for the country.
The main objections to hydro are that it
often entails drowning valleys and that it can
damage natural habitats of wildlife. But if
this is combined with reservoirs for city water
supply and leisure activities, there is not
usually much local opposition.
TIDAL
Photo: Wikipedia
Tides, caused by the gravitational attraction of
the moon and, to a lesser extent, the sun, are
irresistible. There are essentially two ways of
tapping their energy. One is by sort of
underwater windmill. This works where there
The world’s first
commercial-scale and
grid-connected tidal
stream generator in
Strangford Lough,
Northern Ireland
is regular tidal current twice a day in each
direction. Technical problems are considerable.
And there is obviously a risk to shipping and
to marine life. MacKay estimates that we could
generate 2.2kWh/d/p by this means.
The second way is by a tidal lagoon. These
have been used since medieval times to drive
watermills. The lagoon fills at high tide and
then turns the mill as the tide goes out. A
dam across a tidal estuary works in much the
same way.
A Severn barrage has been proposed and
costed at £15 billion. MacKay p216 estimates
a Severn Barrage would produce 0.8 kWh/
d/p. There is much opposition to such a
barrage on environmental grounds.
GEOTHERMAL
Cold water is forced down one hole and hot
water comes up another, heated by the deep
hot rock, which can be used to generate
electricity or directly for heating. There is one
operating in the UK, near Southampton. Here it
is, together with what the Southampton
Business website says about it.
A geothermal and combined heat and power
district energy scheme has been running in
Southampton for over 20 years. A geothermal
well, more than a mile deep, reaches a source
of water that is heated to 76°C by rocks deep
within the earth. The water is channelled to
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
62
CHAPTER NINE
PROS & CONS
OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY SOURCES FOR THE UK?
Photo: Wikipedia
provide electrical power, hot water for central
heating and chilled water for air conditioning.
Whereas a typical power station operates at
25-35% efficiency, the Southampton Plant
operates at 70-85%. However, MacKay (pp
96-99) is fairly unenthusiastic about the
prospects of geothermal making a significant
contribution in the UK. The most optimistic
estimate seems to be that geothermal in the
UK could produce 1.1kWh/d/p for 800 years.
Southampton District Energy Scheme
Nevertheless, the Eden project in Cornwall is
planning to build a geothermal plant nearby
and a larger one is planned near Redruth.
SOLAR
Solar roof panels are of two basic types. The
commonest are solar thermal and simply
help providing hot water. More expensive
are solar photovoltaic panels which convert
sunlight into electricity. They work although
an installer friend says that the current ones
are too heavy for some roofs. And, of course,
the roof needs to be south facing. The table
on page 48, drawn from MacKay, shows that
he estimates the effective contribution from
solar panels at one kWh/d/p if every suitable
roof had one. Photovoltaic panels are about
four times as expensive but generate only
half as much energy as thermal ones. But it
is much more useful energy, namely electric,
whereas thermal panels can be used only to
heat water.
But photovoltaic panels could be placed on
the ground. At least one windfarm installer
is planning to intersperse windmills with
such panels in order to reduce the amount
of land taken up by them. The installer says
they would be no more visually intrusive
than the plastic tunnels that already cover
large areas.
BIOFUELS
Wind is a renewable, coal is not. But what
about biomass, usually consisting of wood
or plants?
Coal-burning Drax in Yorkshire is the UK’s
biggest power station, generating about 8%
of total UK demand, and its biggest emitter
of CO2 . It is currently converting three of its
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
63
six plants to biomass-burning at a cost of
£700 million. When it is operating it will get
a subsidy of £500 million a year according
to some reports.
Biomass is controversial. Some maintain it
is sustainable as the wood (in the case of
Drax) will be replaced by new trees in the
future which will absorb as much CO2 as is
emitted by burning wood now. Many say
this is misleading, not least because Drax’s
wood pellets are imported from the USA.
Dorothy Thompson, the Drax chief
executive, says they have costed every
stage of the process and it is a genuine
low-cost renewable. But do the trees that
provide the wood occupy land that could,
and should, be used for food crops?
A CHP, probably the first in the UK, is being
built by a German company at Ridham
Dock in Kent. It will use about 170,000
tonnes of waste wood a year and will have
an electrical capacity of 23 megawatts –
fairly small, Drax's is 4,000 megawatts.
The fuel will consist of old and used wood
(processed wood and wood from the
surrounding region).
Artist's impression of the plant letsrecycle.com
Photo: Financial Times
MUNICIPAL WASTE
INCINERATORS
From the Daily Mail March 16, 2014, part of an article criticising
the import of wood pellets.
COMBINED HEAT AND POWER
PLANTS (CHP)
CHP means the simultaneous production of
electrical energy and usable heat. The heat
can be used for local heating and the
electricity fed into the grid.
Rather than burying it in a landfill site,
domestic and some industrial waste can be
incinerated to generate electricity. Useful,
but not large, amounts of electricity can be
obtained. But the main reason for them is
to reduce the amount put into landfills.
Commonplace in many countries, waste
incinerators are unpopular here with
opponents claiming they release toxic
gases. But local opposition is gradually
being overcome as the plants get steadily
more efficient. There are about 30 such
plants in the UK at the moment.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
64
CHAPTER NINE
PROS & CONS
OF SOME POSSIBLE ENERGY SOURCES FOR THE UK?
NIMBYISM
Photo: English Country Cottages
NIMBY is an acronym for NOT IN MY BACK
YARD. The term (or the derivative
Nimbyism) is used pejoratively to describe
opposition by residents to a proposal for a
new development close to them. Opposing
residents themselves are sometimes called
Nimbies. The term was coined in the 1980s
by British politician Nicholas Ridley, who
was Conservative Secretary of State for the
Environment. Projects likely to be opposed
include but are not limited to tall
buildings,wind turbines, desalination plants,
landfills,
incinerators, power plants, prisons, and
especially transportation improvements
(e.g. new roads, passenger railways or
highways) and mobile telephone network
masts.
THE POLICY TRILEMMA
We want our energy to be cheap, reliable and
green. These are fundamentally incompatible.
No source of energy satisfies all three of
these requirements.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
Gas and coal are cheap, but dirty. Non
carbon - emitting sources, such as wind or
nuclear, are much more expensive. Solar
and wind are unreliable and need back up
for when the sun doesn't shine or the wind
blow, because there is at the moment no
way of storing large quantities of
electricity.
The only way of partially satisfying all
three requirements is to reduce demand.
Which is why the government taxes
low-emitting cars less and gives grants for
home insulation. But they then need to
raise more money from taxation to
compensate.
All developed countries face the same
conflicting demands. But the UK is unique in
having privatised all its energy generation
and delivery. Whether this will prove a
handicap or an advantage is not clear.
One further point is that poorer countries
– and we are one of the richest – envy
our standard of living and want to enjoy
the same themselves. An essential for this
is energy. We can afford green energy,
but they cannot. We pride ourselves on
developing wind, solar and tidal energy,
but it is currently far too expensive for
most countries.
So, pity the politicians who have to wrestle
with these contradictory demands!
65
APPENDIX:
THE RENEWABLES TARGET:
HOW ARE WE DOING?
The table below was printed in The Economist for
July 4, 2015.
In addition it reduced the incentives to buy
low-emission cars, cut subsidies for solar
power and put back by a year the planned
£1bn subsidy to build a tidal power plant in
Wales. The EU says the UK is now not on
course to meet its target of 15% of
electricity from renewable by 2020, and the
governments own Climate Change
Committee has warned that it is not on
course to meet its targets after 2020 either.
The UK is far from the only country likely to
miss its emission targets, but we certainly
can no longer claim to be a leader in
reducing GHG emissions. And concern has
been expressed by other world leaders that
the UK’s changes of policy will damage the
efforts to agree an emission accord in Paris
in December.
CHANGES IN GOVERNMENT
POLICIES SINCE MAY 2015
The government’s response is that the
schemes it is cutting or scrapping are
flawed and the prime minister will
announce new policies by December. Press
reports of negotiations with Iceland to
build an undersea cable to bring in
electricity generated by water and volcanic
power may be a forerunner of this.
After winning the general election in May 2015,
the Cameron Conservative government quietly
dropped several policies including: subsidies to
new onshore wind farms; supporting the Green
Bank which lends to green schemes; the plan that
all new homes would be carbon neutral; the
Green Deal which gives grants to home
insulation.
Copyright: BEACONS 2017
e
he
ce
ing
ns
os
ium
inc
en
ist
nde
mo
mosp ologist u city uran Pemex c mostat m hange L mission change asure to nsequen eases at t geolog apa
c
e
s
a
e
xc
er
co
el
te
om
en
ent g odity cap xplosion action th charge e tion dec sm clima hermal m ipelines encast r depend mmodity ter
e
t
p
o
p
i
ip
ra
re
re
comm errorism le kWh/d y Tesla ge gene A nimby tts units smission ndustry o n pressu ination c g hardsh t l
P
t
g
a
a
i
y
m
o
n
n
o
H
en
k
w
l
y
a
a
ti
ip
st
ti
rdsh ent life s techno e LNG lea st fumes atts kilo lmines tr authorit distribu ture cont ctor hea easurem e b
id
aw
ul
rie
au
ed
ne
qu
rem
oa
dm
ing
easu ide batte nt techni osal exh watts gig annual c rate min rs reheat dity agric intercon s deman rbon diox uire
t
x
n
e
a
e
a
e
q
o
sp
n dio equirem ioxins di atts meg tribution urnt gen ted tank le comm extractio footprin ishing c afety re an
s
s
u
r
w
on
n
di
y
ab
sq
ula
m
bst
sd
nb
safet bstance lectricity g towers bl gallo heric ins arce valu variatio ents carb S burial r platfor otest su odu
su
pr
CC
sp
sc
licy
lin
tm
ste
te b
ne
t pr
otest roductio vert coo mal was uid atmo ethane t cars po y commi pressed pha disa e impac nts Aims onf
m
l
l
r
n
e
p
m
A
e
o
liq
e
ip
en
sc
om
Aims erence c lar geoth erature eenhous s suffici ion mult clean c ollution ion consu commitm ge good able
p
rt
2
ta
w
nf
gr
cle
HG
ep
ut
so
ds co s hydro ooled tem hquakes dro vehi by propo ve tide G structiv contrib sages CO n percen ive rene plie
e
p
g
s
o
y
e
c
t
u
i
m
a
l
s
d
u
n
r
h
i
t
i
ewab methane action ea fficiency sorbed n oltanic w ustry BP ondition umption ower sta hts repre olution s glut
v
c
v
d
r
s
b
p
e
ns
ig
s
pplie DECC ext coking gatons a ss photo ncome in l scheme audit co ater fuel human r acting re rig crisi ol d
a
i
r
a
i
l
s
r
r
t
g
h
shale sel napt mental ting biom electric umped lu il nuclea l diesel w s criticise y LNG ex estimate sene pet d
ide
me
die
tro
ero
cie
ies
iron
igh
ppl
np
as o
etrol ster env landfill l y worldw objectio id coal g nsport pe democra mand su s quantit LPG jet k pmv volu on
e
tit
te
gr
er
isa
de
ra
ati
ry
er
dp
me d consum uce quan s genera network ulation t be count eserves s engine ery ethan oncerne anel tax hicl
r
p
n
e
c
p
d
n
r
n
es
lo
xatio ficient re e harml NABLE ai ading po odity g eveloped formatio emit refi ponsible old solar venient v n b
v
m
e
f
h
g
d
e
l
n
i
I
ti
e
es
cles radioac s SUSTA hore mis orld com explored g frackin a tsunam uction r ps house torage co s hydrog gas
t
n
w
s
d
n
b
s
i
f
m
n
o
e
l
e
m
f
r
i
le
u
m
r
t
n bo es emiss dfarms o essentia mparab lic fractu fukushik g goods n heat p es deser evelopme eenhous ati
r
o
i
s
s
o
n
u
n
c
n
d
g
t
i
i
i
a
i
G
he
t
a
l
r
s
use g heating w pplies GH terminal ield hydr meltdow anufactu ng insula oon faci objection tribution orkplace te
n
ld
ra
u
ag
s
y
zi
ilf
place nerate s pipeline ication o e sellafie import m ghts gla cations l emocrac needs co old cars w er gene llin
i
w
ge
pl
eh
cal
ion
dri
rau
Po
dd
ent
ing
ppl
ower ion drill eered a us winds sformat tarian d ofuels im propose overnm att hous Scottish tension ione
s
n
g
n
i
x
w
p
s
o
a
n
ge
exte xtract pio il danger target tr dgets ve erators b nt asses g debate bill tera Centrica natural e extract m f
e
h
e
E
n
n
s
l
e
a
i
i
u
m
S
s
a
m
g
c
W
e
ato
niqu i atom fo le politic rain bus mpera in tion argu bal warm system k power S petroleu k techniq t nuclei able
c
lo
A
le
c
lt
in
es
ab
oc
FN
en
t nuc t sustain s carpoo ln EREV g constru policy g els physi E.on ED iscoveri ground r m elem st susta ters
d
iu
r
e
s
co
co
gy
m
rr
er
in
ex co stat met ange Lin mission nge ener tons ba nce ofge osphere gist unde city uran s Pemex mostat m e L
a
m
e
h
o
lo
p
c
ng
er
ue
om
ha
at
on
ur
therm harge ex tion dec limate c al meas s conseq eleases dent geo odity ca explosi action th ge excha de
ar
d
en
rm
mm
on
era
rec
ism
mc
st r
ine
esla age gen nimbyis units the on pipel openca sure dep ation co ip terror yle kWh/ esla rech generati ism
i
n
s
k
y
t
T
i
h
A
a
s
s
tr
ts
ss
re
y
by
ge
NG le fumes HP kilowat transmi ity indus bution p re contam ing hard ment life chnolog G leaka HPA nim wat
i
t
s
N
e
r
s
e
t
r
u
t
t
lo
a
L
r
s
haus gigawat coalmine ing autho ated dist agricult ector he d measu atteries chnique st fume watts ki lm
b
e
n
ts
au
ga
oa
te
in
ity
al
nn
awat ion annu erate m nkers reh commod interco nts dema n dioxide irement osal exh watts gi annual c er
a
n
n
i
p
r
en
n
e
g
ta
ut
is
io
qu
le
bo
strib n burnt g sulated e valuab extract bon footp hing car afety re ioxins d watts me istributio n burnt g ula
rc
sd
ar
ion
llo
llo
ins
c in
ty
uis
sd
ms
bl ga ospheri thane sca icy variat itments c burial sq r platfor ubstance electrici g tower te bbl ga spheric e sc
o
s
n
n
e
tm
lin
te
as
S
ol
m
uid a house m t cars p iply com ssed CC ha disas t protest roductio vert coo ermal w liquid atm se metha t c
lp
lt
th
e
on
en
ac
sp
ien
ien
ou
pre
s gre les suffic rtion mu ean com ollution A ume imp ents Aim ference c solar geo peratur s greenh les suffic rtio
p
cl
ic
ic
ns
tem
ke
on
tm
po
ro
opo
o veh imby pr tide GHG structive bution co 2 commi goods c bles hyd e cooled earthqua ydro veh imby pro tide
ed n
ntri
P de
ave
ion
ewa
tage
ave
s CO
than
ed n
ncy h