July 15, 2009

experts comment on the UK Low Carbon Transition Plan

The UK government has published a White Paper on future energy strategies, including plans to increase sources of renewable energy and set targets on greenhouse gas emissions.

Dr Ricardo F Martinez-Botas, leader of the Electrical Hybrid Vehicles Research Group at the Energy Futures Lab at Imperial College London, said:

“The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan sets a number of challenging targets for the transport area. In particular, is it pleasing that a mix of solutions is clearly laid out, covering substantial efficiency advances of current technology to the more advanced solutions involving electric vehicles and fuel cells. The ambitious target of vehicles with a carbon impact of 95 C02grams/km is welcome and will lead to further advances in internal combustion engine technology with electric hybridisation.

“The UK has a long standing reputation and substantial skill base to tackle this ambitious target. Regarding the electrification of transportation, the encouragement of early takers of electric vehicles by means of price reduction is needed. The benefit is further enhanced when coupled with the government procurement of electric/plug-in vehicles. However, the paper could have targeted additional schemes such as part ownership of vehicles, car clubs and car sharing schemes.”

Dr Jim Watson, Director of the Sussex Energy Group, said:

“The ambition to have 15 million households generating their own energy by 2020 is very welcome.. This will require a radical departure from current policy which has only enabled 100,000 houses to do this. New financial incentives for the public due in 2009 and 2010 are part of the story but the government needs to do more so that the energy industry plays a full part in this change – and breaks the link between their profits and rising household energy demand. The €6m on offer for smart grid development is far too little. Trials of these grids are required now to make a more localised energy system work.”

Prof Ian Arbon, Senior Partner at Engineered Solutions, said:

“At long last the Government seems to be waking up to the reality that engineers have recognised for a decade! Had this been an announcement made in July 1999, it would have had some chance of success by 2020 but, now it’s a case of far too little far too late!

“Along with all Renewable Energy Strategies over the past decade, this one still focuses almost entirely on ‘electricity’ – a far smaller part of energy demand than either ‘heat energy’ or ‘energy for transport’; even where it does mention heat and transport, it naively assumes that these requirements can also be met by electricity – the least energy efficient way of doing so!

“All-in-all, this is the best sounding renewable energy statement so far but is far too narrow-visioned and theoretical to qualify as a ‘strategy’ which will actually result in meeting the legally-binding 2020 commitments the UK Government has rather foolishly agreed on our behalves!”

Tom Foulkes, Director General of the Institution of Civil Engineers, said:

“The UK has been facing an energy crisis for years and so far there has been too much delay in addressing it. With legally binding carbon reduction targets and the likelihood of increasing demand in future Government must engage engineering expertise as early as possible to ensure engineering solutions can be rolled out on the huge scale required. Creating renewable energy sources is a vital part of the energy mix, however it is crucial that in prioritising them Government doesn’t undermine wider carbon reduction goals. Any infrastructure we build now will have an impact on our carbon emissions for years to come.

“The ICE also welcomes the feed-in tariffs for home-owners who set up their own renewable energy generators. Encouraging individual contributions to emissions reduction will be essential to achieving a low carbon economy.”

Prof Stuart Haszeldine, Professor of Geosciences at the University of Edinburgh, said:

“This gives us the why and the which, but much less on the who, when, and with what. It is new, profitable, projects that will make low carbon energy and heat; otherwise the UK will still build gas, gas, gas, and more gas.

“Will the UK win this low carbon race? Others are finishing the quarter finals, while we are still planning the best stadium. Markets and householders will only deliver renewable energy if enough profit can be seen at the end of the track. Eventually the Government must move from analysis paralysis to doing and building; maybe these are the first steps into that valley of death.”

Dr Robert Gross, Head of UKERC Technology and Energy Policy Researcher at Imperial College London, said:

“British policies to date have been less than effective at creating a secure environment for investment. Developing a British supply chain is essential. Much of our renewable technology is imported and currency movements can make costs rise rapidly, as seen with offshore wind. Other countries have been much better at creating green industries and jobs. Action is needed to direct investment to UK ports and factories.

“Already we have seen offshore developments floated across the North Sea from ports and factories in Denmark. As yet specific measures to capture UK benefits remain modest. The strategy shows decisive action in some areas – for example, action on grid connection is essential and the government will over-rule Ofgem and push this through. It remains to be seen whether commitment to the UK manufacturing base is as real and decisive as this.”

Dr David Brown, Chief Executive of the Institution of Chemical Engineers (IChemE), said:

“The Low Carbon Transition Plan acknowledges that ‘clean coal’, nuclear power and renewables will all be needed, as well as dramatic efficiency gains and better energy conservation. There is no single solution to our future energy needs and a balanced mix of sources is required to ensure a sustainable supply.

“Any proposals for new coal fired power stations must show a clear pledge to the early use of carbon capture. It is important to recognise that there are several ways of achieving this. The preoccupation with post-combustion capture, where carbon dioxide is scrubbed from chimney stacks, is unhelpful and government must resist the pressures from industry lobbyists who favour a single dominant technology.

“There is an equally strong case for pre-combustion methods where carbon dioxide is captured more efficiently and in a form that is ideally suited to storage.

“The supply of properly qualified workers presents a major challenge. Many of the estimated 400,000 jobs created by the plan will require skilled engineers and it’s essential that the teaching of science, technology, engineering and maths in our schools and universities remains a top priority.”

Dr Clifford Jones, Reader In Engineering at the University of Aberdeen, said:

“Thermonuclear generation of electricity does not in any direct sense produce carbon dioxide, so the soundness of the policy of expanding nuclear generation is on those grounds clear. Generation of electricity by this means does have issues of its own. The inherently much more powerful heat release of nuclear processes when compared to chemical necessitates close attention to safety and to risk assessment.

“Proposals that the UK should be expanding offshore wind electricity generation can only be good. It is however well known that reliable electricity supply from wind farms requires significant over-capitalisation in turbines because of variations and uncertainties in wind speed. This can make for expensive electricity.

“It is encouraging to see proposals for development of geothermal electricity. This is a reality in a number of places including California and Hawaii. According to the report it is intended to use all the geothermal energy in SW England to make electricity. It can of course be used for heating directly, in which case in principle a better return on the energy will be obtained.”

Robert Freer, independent engineering consultant, said:

“This White Paper appears to be a lost opportunity. The Government could have set out a comprehensive energy policy which would have kept the lights on and identified security of supply as the first priority. This would have supported Tony Blair’s prediction in 2006 that ‘security of supply is the most important of the immense challenges facing us’.

“Instead, the Government has chosen to promote more uneconomic wind farms which will do nothing at all to ensure security of supply and, since they are only intermittent, will need back-up from conventional power stations which in turn will increase carbon emissions rather than reduce them. The consumers will have to pay for making matters worse rather than better.

“The so-called emissions targets are unrealistic and the hope that other countries will adopt them is wishful thinking. Their priorities are different. If the Government had appointed a Chief Engineering Adviser to advise the DECC these mistakes could have been avoided, and we might not have ended up with these Alice in Wonderland proposals.”

Stephen Tetlow, Chief Executive of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, said:

“Whilst the IMechE welcomes this latest attempt to set some clear plans for Renewable Energy here in the UK, we should remember we are already behind schedule and we must do all we can to avoid any further delays. The reality is that we should have moved on this agenda ages ago. It is too late already and our infrastructure is not fit for purpose.

“To achieve a 34% reduction in CO2 emissions by 2020 it will be necessary to decarbonise the economy at around 4% per annum, a figure that no country in the world has achieved to-date. Even during the UK’s ‘dash for gas’ era of the mid-1990s which lead to an accelerated decarbonisation of the UK economy (through the move away from coal) we only achieved a rate of 2.3% per year (1992-1998), whereas in recent years (1999-2006) we have been decarbonising at 1.3% per year despite a government push on renewables and energy efficiency. It will take a lot more than insulating every home and constructing a few more wind farms to achieve the necessary decarbonisation.

“France, with a largely nuclear electricity generation supply infrastructure, provides a useful indicator of the challenge. At its peak rate of decarbonisation, while implementing its nuclear programme, France achieved a rate of decarbonisation of about 2.5% per annum from 1980 – 2006. To maintain a credible rate of progress towards meeting the 2020 34% target the UK needs to become as carbon efficient as France currently is by 2015. This, for example would require the UK to build around 30 new (low-carbon) nuclear power plants, and have them operational by 2015, displacing coal and gas fired electrical generation.”

Brian Bowsher, Managing Director of the National Physical Laboratory, said:

“If we want to secure a low-carbon future and ensure that we truly meet government targets for climate change then some essential new conditions need to be put in place. In short, we need to be able to demonstrate that ‘it does what it says on the tin’; i.e. that there are internationally agreed standards in place that will allow carbon to be traded and mitigation technologies to be assessed.

“All markets need to be robust and stable and the ‘carbon’ market is no different. There are currently multiple and inconsistent measurements, calculations and estimation protocols for greenhouse gas emission and avoidance. This provides an inadequate basis for businesses, consumers and governments alike. The size of the carbon market (c. £100bn) and its potential growth makes introduction of agreed measurement standards vital.

“Any strategies to reduce our collective carbon footprint – whether through nuclear or renewable sources of energy – will need the international measurement standards to underpin this market.”

Prof Ian Fells FREng, Principal Consultant at Fells Associates, said:

“The desperate reliance on wind, both on and offshore, to meet the renewable target would be much better directed to the cheaper and more predictable Severn Barrage as a source of 5% of UK electricity.”

Hannah Chalmers, Energy Technology for Sustainable Development Group at Imperial College London, said:

“The Government announcements today confirm significant ambition for action to mitigate the risk of dangerous climate change. It is now crucial that this ambition becomes reality. It is also important that action taken to achieve UK targets for 2020 makes an effective contribution to international efforts to achieve at least 50% global CO2 emissions reduction by 2050.”

Prof Dave Delpy, Chief Executive of the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, said:

“High quality research and postgraduate training is essential for the UK to meet its energy and environmental targets. The Research Council’s Energy programme led by the EPSRC (Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council) is investing more than £300 million in a whole system approach to energy options, supply and usage which includes the development of solar, wind, marine and bio-energy renewable sources. The research we fund is also providing tomorrow’s solutions in carbon capture and storage, transport and energy efficiency. These investments underpin our ability not only live sustainably, but also to create the jobs developing new technologies for a global market in our low carbon future.”