Do you need to worry about ESOS?

Probably not.

You may not qualify and even if you do the reporting deadline is not until 5 December 2015.  

ESOS is the energy savings opportunity scheme. It implements art. 8 of the EU Energy efficiency directive.  It's a regulation but the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) say that they will operate it with a light touch. Certainly it's very different from CRC. It's not a tax and although there could be penalties they will only apply in exceptional cases.The objective is to save energy, to make organisations more efficient and therefore more competitive, although in the face of collapsing oil prices and falling coal and gas prices the urgency of this may not be immediately apparent. Of course, to a large extent reducing energy usage reduces the nation's carbon footprint which is high on the priority list for DECC.

So is your organisation covered by ESOS?

If your organisation is in the public sector then it is excluded. If you operate in the private sector you are covered by ESOS if you employ more than 250 staff or you have a balance sheet total of more than £34 million or an annual turnover of more than £40 million. The reference date for this is 31st December 2014. ESOS applies to all UK operations which meet the criteria even if the ultimate owner is overseas. It also applies to non-profit organisations which fulfil the other criteria.

Assuming that you are covered by ESOS,  the first requirement is for you to identify the energy that you use in your buildings, your industrial processes and in transport. You must calculate the total use over a 12 month period and present an audit trail to justify your figures. If appropriate, you can use data from other schemes like the CRC or the EU emissions trading system to back up your results.You then have to audit at least 90% of the energy used by your organisation in accordance with the ESOS criteria.Your audit plan must be approved by your lead assessor. This may be an employee or an external consultant. Either way, the lead assessor must be qualified and appear on the Approved Register held by iema (Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment) or by a number of other Approved Organisations. A full list of Approved Registers is on the GOV.UK website.

 Once your audit is complete the report must be signed off by your lead assessor and by a director of the company. It must then be submitted to the environment agency not later than 5 December 2015. The environment agency is the scheme administrator. The next stage is to act on the ESOS audit recommendations.The whole objective of the process is the help organisations find ways of being more efficient and making better use of energy, so this step is arguably the most important. 

The Environment Agency will review a sample of audit reports and may possibly wish to review yours. Apart from that, your only obligation is to produce your next audit report in four years’ time: 2019.

At the time of writing, 15th January 2015, the oil price is around $47/barrel. That means it’s more than halved since the summer. Some say it’s down for the long term and I talk about that in "Energy - the story of 2015". For the moment, ESOS is designed to help save energy and that must sharpen your competitive edge, whatever the energy price. And designing and implementing energy saving strategies now is protecting your organisation against the day the price spikes back up again.

Want to know more? Go to www.gov.uk and search for ESOS, or drop me an email: mail@anthony-day.com 

Computing for the Future of the Planet.

On 25th June 2103 I attended this presentation by Andy Hopper, President of the Institute of Engineering and Technology (IET) and director of the Cambridge University Computer Laboratory, as part of the York Festival of Ideas. This is what I learnt.

It’s about the crossover between computing and sustainability. It’s not the answer to sustainability but it is a contribution to the answer to sustainability. 

Green Computing 

Green computing is about establishing an optimal digital infrastructure. For example, 3-4% of the world’s total energy is used by computers and communications. How much of this energy consumption can be offset? Prof Hopper described how technology can be used to move the processing load around the world to where surplus energy is available. Renewable energy is notorious for intermittence. Sometimes power is generated but there is no use for it so it is wasted. If data centres are located close to sources of renewable energy these surpluses can be used. Global networks permit processing to be carried out wherever this “free” energy is available. Google, which alone has some 1.5 million servers, is already using software to carry this out automatically.

Data centres can be designed for economy and efficiency and computer architecture can be built so that instead of having two extreme states – standby and full power – there can be a proportionate increase or decrease in computer usage as processing demand fluctuates. Increasing hardware performance and more interconnected devices will improve energy efficiency. Workload trends will also affect energy consumption - increases in batch processing and increasing amounts of data produced and consumed. Recognising that not all processing is needed on demand but that some can be scheduled to smooth peaks and troughs will also improve efficiency.

All these measures could lead to future energy savings of 15-20%.

Computing for Green

Having established the most green and efficient computing infrastructure, how do we use this to green the rest of society? Professor Hopper talked of a “Google of Everything” - a universal data resource available to all and with information about everyone and everything. For example, Google Street View could be adapted to give an infra-red view and to immediately reveal where houses are losing heat. This is a first step to saving energy on heating. He told us about Ubisense, a system for tracking objects in three dimensions with an accuracy of  15cm. This is used by BMW not only to track assembly equipment, but also to programme it according to its next task. As the unit approaches a nut it is programmed with the number of turns it should give and the required torque. As it moves to the next nut the system automatically re-programmes it. The result is increased efficiency - more accuracy, less manual intervention, time saved. Accurate tracking already saves money and improves efficiency for Airbus, in public transport depots, dairy farms, distribution centres and convalescent homes.

The big question is how far we go to track ourselves. It is possible to track an individual’s energy footprint, carbon footprint or water footprint. It is also theoretically possible to track an individual’s location to a very high degree of accuracy. With data as detailed as this we can take action to control the use of energy, carbon or water. This would include managing services within buildings according to their occupation and use, monitored in real time. We can give people feedback and tailored incentives. Other sorts of wearable sensors could monitor an individual’s state of health, so if they felt unwell they could go to the doctor and provide a read-out to help him make a diagnosis. (Or maybe the sensor detects a life-threatening condition and automatically calls the ambulance!) A major obstacle to this is the trust issue. Will people believe that their privacy is respected and trust their governments with their data? Just at the moment, with the GCHQ and PRISM issues, evidence of cover-ups and secrecy in the NHS and the police and a legal system way behind technological reality, many people will refuse to participate.

Another example of the benefits of technology is the electronic shoe. A shoe with strain gauges built in to analyse the gait of the runner accelerating, cruising and slowing down. Valuable information for trainers, but an adaptation could monitor the runner’s weight and send an alarm if it fell out side the normal range. Raspberry Pi, the ultra-cheap computer, gives today’s youth an introduction to computing and makes them aware of the threats to privacy from surveillance and hackers. At the same time, this generation is totally relaxed about posting almost anything on Facebook - the bad and the good for all to see for all time. Smartphones, particularly with location services enabled, potentially compromise privacy. However, it is now possible to use fake data when requested by apps, to get the service without giving away private details. But how long before this “mocking” can be detected?

Will we demand privacy and restrict data which could otherwise improve sustainability - consumption patterns, energy use etc? Trends indicate that we will allow our privacy to be gradually eroded. After all, caller ID was once thought to be the work of the devil and now everyone takes it for granted.

Assured Computing

Computer systems are now crucial to society. They are like a pacemaker for the planet: we cannot afford them to stop. We can use more detailed knowledge of ourselves and the way we use the world to take measures to tackle global warming, traffic management and energy demand. However, the more data we manage, the more challenges arise. What parameters of error can we accept? Is there a clear audit trail to authenticate the data? How can we assure privacy and security? 

For the future, Professor Hopper looked forward to robust, self-correcting energy management and mapping systems on a global scale. He’d like to see a method of absolutely removing an image from the internet. At present, nothing can be revoked. Those party pictures you posted on Facebook are there for ever. He’d like to see an application which analyses the correctness of news. He called it a virtual BBC “More or Less”. [More or Less is a BBC Radio 4 series which picks out statistics in the news and shows how they have been twisted, misquoted or wilfully misunderstood.]

Wealth in Cyberspace

This last section of the presentation was quite difficult to understand. Our speaker mentioned an “Ebay for all”. Does he mean that the internet will provide everything we ever need. That we’ll shop on line, meet up on line and have all our life experiences on line? Will we no longer need to travel? He suggested that the developing world could go straight to this state of data abundance, without going through the stages that the developed world passed through.

Not altogether sure what he meant here. Has he read “The Machine Stops” by E M Forster, I wonder? (Perhaps Ross Noble has read it, although it doesn’t mention moles.)

CRC Update

More than 4,000 organisations still to register - less than 12 weeks to the 30th September cut-off - more time for disaggregation - PFI: who’s responsible? - landlord and tenant - Early Action Metric - monitoring carbon footprint - buying allowances - evidence pack and audit - super-smart metering to save energy and save cost.

The total number of CRC full participants was estimated at 5,000 and according to the Environment Agency only 651 have so far registered. That leaves less than 12 weeks for the remaining 4,349 to complete the process by 30th September. Of course you may already have started, but if you’re waiting to clear up some minor query or you have some doubts about your particular case the Environment Agency urges you to register now and sort out queries and errors later. No doubt there will be increasing pressure on the system as we get closer to the cut-off.

Good news if you were planning for disaggregation. The Environment Agency has extended the initial deadline until 31st July, although all your SGUs still have to be registered on their own account by 30th September.

Some organisations operate facilities provided under PFI and the PFI company has claimed that the organisation which uses the facilities is responsible. The Environment Agency has now made it clear that the “counterparty to the supply contract” principle applies, so if the PFI company is paying the bill then the PFI company is the participant.

CRC remains an issue for landlords. Remember, if you bought more than 6,000MWh of half-hourly electricity in 2008 you are a full participant even if you sold that electricity on to your tenants. When we get to the reporting phase, the landlord is responsible for reporting the total carbon footprint from all energy sources, including energy used by tenants. Can you negotiate an amendment to the lease? The CRC legislation gives you obligations, but no additional rights vis-à-vis the tenant.

If you are a tenant and taking steps to improve your energy efficiency, will the landlord pass on the benefit of lower CRC costs to you? Again, can you re-negotiate the lease?

Your Performance League Table position and your total CRC cost are both affected by the Early Action Metric and it’s not too late to get the benefit. The earlier you put in voluntary AMRs (automatic meter reading) the better, because the benefit is calculated on the proportion of your total energy that flows through them in 2010/11. Don’t forget gas meters. You have until 31st March 2011 to achieve the Carbon Trust Standard. As long as you have it in place by that date you qualify in full. The Environment Agency has just approved CEMARS as an alternative to the Carbon Trust Standard. Other standards are under review.

Quite apart from the Early Action Metric and your league table position, the surest way to reduce your CRC costs is to improve your energy efficiency and cut your energy bills. Have I told you about the super-smart metering that gives you instant feedback and detailed analysis for close cost control? Give me a call on 07803 616877 and I’ll tell you more!

Once registration is complete the next task is to prepare for the annual report and for the purchase of carbon allowances in April 2011. You need to have an evidence pack, and 20% of all participants will be audited. Have you been monitoring your carbon footprint since April? Have you got detailed records and an audit trail?

If you would like to discuss any of these points in more detail please give me a call on my direct line: 07803 616877. Together with strategic partners, Cyber Associates can help and advise on CRC registration, obtaining benefit from the Early Action Metric, monitoring your carbon footprint and establishing an employee engagement programme to maximise your energy efficiency.

I look forward to talking to you!

Best wishes,

Anthony Day

PS NoWatt, our super-smart metering partners, have a window in August due to customer holidays. If you want a rapid assessment and installation we can help you to start saving money on energy in a matter of weeks. Call me on 07803 616877!

CRC - do you need to buy allowances next April?

The CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme which came into effect on 1st April 2010 is a sort of carbon-trading system for larger organisations. I say “sort of” because the government sells carbon allowances in April and gives all the money back in October. Those organisations which do really well in controlling their emissions, and hence find themselves at the top of the league table (more of that later!), will get their money back with a bonus of up to 10%. In order to pay these bonuses those who do less well will be penalised to the same extent. Over 5 years this bonus/penalty will rise to 50%.

Let’s look at the first year. In April 2011 you have to buy allowances to cover your EXPECTED emissions in 2011/12. In October 2011 the cost of those allowances will be returned to you with a bonus or penalty depending on your ACTUAL performance in 2010/11. Your cost is therefore the cost of having your money tied up from April to October, offset or increased by the bonus/penalty. This bonus/penalty, by the way, at 10% of your allowances will be less than 0.7% of your energy bill.

What if you don’t buy any allowances next April? You don’t have to surrender them until July 2012 and there will be another sale of allowances in April 2012. By then you will know exactly how much you need and allowances can be transferred from year to year within each phase. If you adopt this procedure you will defer the cash flow effect (not increase it, because you will not buy anything for the following year either. When you get to the end of Phase 1 you can buy exactly the allowances you need, which is important because if you have any extras they cannot be carried into Phase 2 and so will be worthless.

Of course, if you do this you’ll miss out on a possible bonus in Year 1, but is 0.7% of your bill such a big deal?

CRC - is the league table a red herring?

For most people, the Performance League Table is a red herring.

Depending on how scheme participants manage their carbon footprints, they will be assigned a ranking on the Performance League Table. This will be publicly available, so the theory is that organisations will not wish to be named and shamed for appearing low down in the league. Secondly, there are financial penalties associated with your league table position.

Since the Environment Agency took over much of the information on CRC seems to have become both more complicated and more vague. For example, the fixed price for carbon allowances was originally announced at £12/tonne. This does not appear to be confirmed on the current CRC website. When participants get their money back through recycling payments, the original plan was that they would get a bonus or a penalty depending on their position on the league table. This could be between 5% and 50%. Again, these figures do not appear on the new CRC website.

Cyber Associates has requested clarification of these points from the CRC helpdesk, but in the meantime let’s use the original figures. On that basis a 5% bonus or penalty on your recycling payment is about 0.3% of your bill. That’s why we believe that the League Table is a red herring.

You will gain far more by reducing your energy usage than by trying to improve your league table position.

After all - as will be revealed at the 10th June conference - many participants will be prevented from taking advantage of the early Action Metrics and will have no way to improve their position at all.

This is all part of the obligation under the Climate Change Act to cut CO2 by 34% by 2020 and 80% by 2050. With UK emissions still growing, even standing still will be difficult. The oil price has been on the rise for most of this year, so energy is going to be expensive to buy and if you use it inefficiently the government is making it even more expensive to use!

Low Carbon Futures - The Prince's May Day Summit

Last Friday I attended the Prince’s May Day Summit. That’s the Prince of Wales’s third annual convention of businesses committed to a low carbon future, sponsored by Carbon Action Yorkshire, CE Electric UK and KCom Group. The event links London to regional centres all round the country, at least the first one did two years ago. We voted on issues, shared the results with the nation and spoke direct to the national audience. A bit like the Last Night of the Proms, actually, with big screens and reporters across the country. Not this time, though. This year we watched as the Prince and other speakers addressed what looked like a very small London audience. And we only watched - there was no feedback from the regions.

Strange - and disappointing - because since the Carbon Budget and Obama’s green grandstanding, low carbon and climate change are almost mainstream. I was at the regional session in Hull, an enthusiastic meeting ably chaired by Peter Hobday. If we hadn’t had the London link I’d have come away encouraged that more and more people were on side. In Hull the presentations were positive. They didn’t minimise the climate change risks and they showed us best practice and they showed us opportunities. They made us realise that the world is fundamentally changing, that established and accepted business models may suddenly cease to be relevant and unimagined models may suddenly steal your market. Think Amazon. Think iTunes store.

Case studies showed how companies are actively reducing their carbon footprint, and doing it for business reasons. Ariel low-temperature detergent was developed because more CO2 was released through heating water in the washing machine than in the rest of the production, distribution and usage cycle. Marshalls the paving people were the first to footprint all 500 of their products - the nearest competitor has footprinted nine - and they now know how and where to cut carbon further. Their customers know that this is a company which is serious about the environment. ASDA recycles, sources locally and deals with sustainable suppliers. KCOM engages with staff to support its green initiatives.

We learnt about scenario planning; not as a means of predicting the future nor as business continuity planning. Scenarios ask “What if?” What if your key materials double or quadruple in price? What if energy rises by a factor of 10? What if your major customer goes bust? Examining such scenarios helps your company be prepared. The value is in the process, not the result; the process of questioning unquestioned truths, establishing the consequences, weighing the risks and defining the options.

One statistic that I won’t forget showed that while material wealth has steadily grown in the UK since 1960, satisfaction has stayed at the same level. Apparently, we do not need material wealth for a fulfilling life. The problem is that growth has been the only goal for more than a generation; we have no alternative vision and people are scared to give up what they have.

So here’s the challenge. Let’s stop scaring people with global meltdown, climate catastrophe and the end of the world. Let’s draw up our low carbon futures and show people how they can be more relaxing, more fulfilling and maybe more stimulating than the ambitions we have now. At least I came away from the May Day Summit believing that we certainly have the people who can imagine these futures - and the people able and determined to make them reality.

Is the future of your business a low-carbon future? It’s got to be! If you want to talk about how, give me a call - 01904 654986.

The Age of Stupid

Do we need another misery movie?

Review: The Age of Stupid - premiere at Leicester Square and 65 cinemas across the country.

In The Age of Stupid Pete Postlethwaite addresses us from the wrecked planet of 2055 and asks how we could be so stupid as to let climate change destroy humanity. He flicks through endless archives showing us the obvious clues to catastrophe from 2009 and before. It seemed a long film, partly because technical problems meant that about 30 minutes of footage was played twice. Partly, too, because it replayed the breast-beating and lamentations already seen in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, Leonardo di Caprio’s The Eleventh Hour, The Day After Tomorrow and all the rest.

What these films lack, and that includes the live debate following The Age of Stupid, is a credible call to action. Watching this film you might conclude that the best thing to do is to run your car on chip fat, live self-sufficiently on a small holding and protest against the nasty nimbies who oppose wind farms. It goes without saying that there’s not enough chip fat and not enough smallholdings. The effectiveness of wind farms is also very much in doubt. After the film Pete Postlethwaite pledged to give back his OBE if the government approved the proposed new Kingsnorth coal-fired power station. Ed Milliband was there to respond, but they let him off extremely lightly by not once mentioning government support for Heathrow’s third runway. Surely that’s a much more powerful national political issue than some power station down in Kent.

Sustainable economic growth is still possible in a low carbon economy, but if we are going to solve this problem we must all drive less, heat less and consume less. Life will be very different - potentially much more pleasant - if we take the low-carbon route. The Age of Stupid has missed the opportunity to show what ordinary people can do to safeguard our future, and to show what sort of future we can all enjoy if we act now. Certainly the showing raised enthusiasm both in Leicester Square and in the cinema where I was, but I fear that people will be rushing off to protest, rather than rushing off to change their lives.

Panic Over?

Tanker drivers back at work - oil price stable (more or less) - Dyson to build electric cars and Honda launches a hydrogen car - five new main railway lines - retail sales up in May - Gordon in Saudi - ...and a renewable energy strategy which will cut our use of oil. So is it all over?

I’ve been away on holiday and it’s amazing what can change in a week. Before you ask, no, we didn’t fly anywhere, we went to Newcastle by train and walked the whole length of Hadrian’s Wall. (Well, all but 10 miles!)

Hello. I'm Anthony Day and I’m back again to talk to you about staying in business and staying profitable. Last time we were worried about the price of oil and a tanker drivers’ strike which was making petrol unobtainable as well as unaffordable. This week the drivers have gone back to work for a pay rise of only 14% and oil has (almost) stopped rising. But who’s worried about oil when there are suddenly a range of alternatives?

First, James Dyson, the vacuum cleaner king, is turning his talents to designing electric cars. He’s developed a super-efficient electric motor. Honda have announced their hydrogen car and Network Rail are looking into building no less than five new high-speed rail lines across the UK. The feel-good factor is reinforced by the news that retail sales in May were the highest for 22 years, but if you still think we need cheaper oil Gordon’s been out there in Saudi not only asking them to pump faster but also suggesting that they should invest in renewables in the UK.On 26th June the government publishes its Renewable Energy Strategy. The predictions are that this will include plans for 3,500 wind turbines and will reduce the nation’s use of oil by 7% by 2020.

So is this all good news? Is the panic over? Can we all go back to making money? People accuse me of being depressing, but all I’m trying to do is be realistic and look at the best choices for business in a future that’s far from clear.

The most important point is that we have an energy crisis, and while there are solutions like electric cars, new railway lines and thousands of wind turbines; none of these can become a reality in less than 5 years and the rest will take more like ten or twenty. Oil prices are high today. They may drift up and down over the coming months, but they are unlikely to drop below $100. My prediction is $180 by the end of the year and $300 by the end of 2010 unless we see a dramatic global recession. as I predicted last time, gas and electricity are on the rise and some reports talk of a 40% increase by Christmas.

As business people, what can we do? Maybe we should try a protest - it worked well for the tanker drivers! However, few businesses can hold their customers to ransom like that. Rather than waste time and effort on protests and demonstrations (a bit like Canute trying to turn back the waves) we should consider what to do to make the best of it. We need to assess the effect on our supply chain; on our suppliers and our customers. This need not be negative - suppliers of home insulation are surely going to see an upturn!

We need to act now, but we also need to plan for the future. Scenario planning lets you prepare for a number of alternative futures and therefore be more ready to cope with what actually happens. Take some time with your team to brainstorm to think the unthinkable and decide what you could do about it.

The truth is that the future is not rosy for those who believe that we can go back to business as usual. The good news is not good when we examine it in detail. For example, electric cars need to be built and bought, and are you going to buy one? How much energy will it take to replace the UK’s 30m cars? We’ll all charge them up a night when electricity demand is low - except demand won’t be low because we’ll all be charging our cars. So we’ll need more coal or gas or nuclear to run the power stations. Could be a bit of a problem as we are already finding it difficult to cope with current demand for electricity without all this demand displaced from oil. Much the same applies to hydrogen. The car itself is pollution-free but there’s a massive carbon footprint at the power station where they generate the energy to produce the hydrogen. The renewables strategy will apparently reduce our dependency on oil by 7% over 12 years. Given that North Sea oil output is declining by about 6% per annum, this is merely a drop in the bucket. And even Gordon Brown admitted that his visit to Saudi would have no immediate effect on prices at the pumps.

My message is that we have to plan for a different future in order to succeed. Those that don’t, like Canute, will first get their feet wet and then be washed away.

I’m Anthony Day. If you want to talk about scenario planning for how energy, climate and resources will affect your business, give me a call on 01904 654 986.

Talking of Climate Change…

I spent this weekend at the Professional Speakers Association. We’re a group of experts who speak on our specialist subjects. My main activity is communicating the issues on energy and climate change to business audiences. As an expert on the topic it is essential that my communication skills are as good as they can be. Nothing is ever achieved if a message is sent but not properly received or understood. As a speaker I’m a member of Toastmasters International, which means that nearly every week I’m speaking in front of an audience – prepared speeches or impromptu – and getting feedback from the audience in a structured way. I know what I mean to tell them; often it’s very instructive to find out what they actually heard! Change of emphasis, change of pace, change of structure can all have a radical effect on the message received.

The Professional Speakers Association is for speakers making a business of speaking. Friday was a Board meeting and Chapter Leadership forum, but Saturday was one of our National Events. These events are designed for members but invited guests are welcome too. Our first session, which raised a lot of discussion, was given by Nick Oulton on the use of PowerPoint. Many people believe that slides have no place in a keynote speech because we are giving a speech, not making a presentation. Our speaker (presenter?) showed how badly PowerPoint can be used, and how dramatically different a well-designed presentation can be. Generally I’m with the purists: if it’s a slide show it’s not a speech. On the other hand, some of the statistics involved in energy and climate change are difficult to get across without a graph, and a flip-chart looks amateur. I can’t think of a prop I could use instead, but any suggestions gratefully received.

Our second speaker was Fergus McClelland, expert in all things vocal. He explained the different characteristics of all the microphones we are likely to come across. Each has different advantages and disadvantages and each must be tuned to your voice, so it’s important to make friends with the sound man who is likely to be working long hours and getting paid far less than the speaker. Fergus told us about recording equipment, mixing software and how to make our own CDs and podcasts.

Our third speaker was Terry Brock, stopping over on his world tour on his way back to Florida. Terry is into all things technical. He’s an entertaining and accomplished speaker and he was showing us how the latest technology can help us develop products and promote ourselves. It’s difficult to do him justice on the page, so I suggest you visit his website for yourself and find out the sort of things he’s recommending. I shall be adopting some of them myself, and you can be sure that I’ll let you know all about them.

As you know, I’m an expert who speaks about energy and climate change. I’m convinced that these are the greatest challenges that businesses and individuals currently face. The PSA helps me get that message across. Our Annual Convention will be at the Radisson Heathrow in November. Come and find out what Professional Speakers can do for you.

Have we got the energy?

I received a post today asking why I thought that renewable energy could only ever account for about 20% of our total requirements. Surely if we cut our total energy use that proportion could be greater? I also said that microgeneration could actually increae co2 emissions. Why?

Here's my answer:

"I suggest you read "Energy beyond oil" by Paul Mobbs which is an excellent review of our energy options - and challenges. It explains all the technical issues in detail but in a very readable form.

Yes, I agree we can go a long way towards reducing our energy demand, but in spite of those people who are already cutting down, UK energy demand continues to grow. We will have to make life-changing decisions to really have an effect. The problem with renewables - wind, wave, tide and solar - is that they are intermittent and cannot be controlled to match the fluctuating demand from the grid. Indeed, if they account for a major proportion of electricity production they provide great difficulties for the grid controllers who have to deal not only with fluctuating demand but fluctuating supply as well. If they can't balance supply and demand the risk is that the grid becomes unstable with cascading failures and power cuts. Biomass and biogas are renewables which can provide power 24/7 and are controllable, but the problem here is that growing biofuel crops competes for land where food is grown (or in some cases where rain forest grows) and the planting, harvesting, processing and transporting of biofuel all takes energy so biofuel is not carbon neutral and some studies have suggested that the process absorbs more energy than it yields.

Microgeneration? Microgeneration of electricity comes from wind or solar. Micro-hydro is possible, but very, very few people will have a suitable water source. In all cases we must look at the total life cycle, which includes the energy used and CO2 emitted in the manufacture, installation and disposal of the turbine or solar panel. Unless the unit saves more CO2 during its useful life than is emitted at these stages, it is actually contributing to CO2, not saving it. A wind turbine needs a steady flow at about 10-12 metres per second. If you go to the DTI wind speed database you will find the average speed for your postcode. The average is only about 6mps. A turbine running at 6mps produces a lot less than half the electricity of a unit at 12mps - it is not a simple straight-line relationship. The other problem - which rules turbines out for most urban locations - is turbulence. Trees, roofs, chimneys and lamposts all cause turbulence which means the airflow - and direction - is constantly changing. The turbine may overspeed, which will damage it, or run too slowly to produce any power. If it is swinging backwards and forwards in the gusts it will not produce a useful output. Once you have the electricity you either have to convert it to ac and transform it to mains voltage (a process absorbing energy) or use it to charge a battery. In the second case you have the additional cost of the battery and of your low-voltage dc lighting circuit or whatever you are using, together with the CO2 emissions involved in manufacturing this kit. In the first case you can sell electricity back to the grid if you aren't using it, but the bit left after transformation and rectification will be subject to further losses in the grid and you will be paid only 4p per unit compared with the 10 or 15p it will cost you to buy it back.

Solar panels have the same problems of rectification and transformation if you go for mains voltage and the same extra costs of batteries etc if you go for low voltage dc. I believe the disposal of solar panels is problematical because of the heavy metals and rare elements they contain. In fact the increasing scarcity of such substances will probably severely limit the availability of solar panels.

Sorry this is such a long answer. Hope it makes sense!"

No point having a blog

..unless people read it! I learnt the other day that people are most likely to visit a blog if they have read about it in someone else's blog. Apparently this beats search engines and any opther form of referral. I got this information from Graham Jones who specialises in internet marketing and optimising your presence on the web. Here's a link to his blog - http://www.grahamjones.co.uk

It's worth a visit - he's always giving away free stuff!

And if you write a blog on energy and climate change issues as I do, send me a link and I'll put it in another post - and I hope you'll do the same for me!

2020 vision at the EU

This week European Union leaders have been debating carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and they have a firm commitment to achieve at least a 20% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 compared to 1990. Furthermore, they will increase energy efficiency in the EU so as to achieve the objective of saving 20% of the EU's energy consumption compared to projections for 2020,

Central to this is a binding target of a 20% share of renewable energies in overall EU energy consumption by 2020 and a 10% binding minimum target to be achieved by all Member States for the share of biofuels in overall EU transport petrol and diesel consumption by 2020.

Leaving aside the controversy generated by Channel 4’s film – whether CO2 reduction is possible or worth while – there must still be doubts about whether any of this is achievable. Elsewhere in this blog I have commented on how biofuels are much less green than people would like to think. Biofuel crops absorb CO2, but growing, harvesting and processing them takes up so much energy that the net gain is small or in some cases negative. Growing the crops puts pressure on food crops or rain forests, and to some extent we will burn green fuels while exporting the disadvantages of the fuels to third world countries where the crops are grown.

Biomass is part of the way towards reaching the EU’s 20% target. Today Drax Power, which runs the UK’s largest power station, announced plans to grow biomass on an area equivalent to one fifth of the land of Wales. This will produce sufficient fuel to provide 10% of the requirements of Drax. The station produces 8% of the UK’s electricity, so biomass will account for just 0.8%. If we took over the whole of Wales to grow biofuel crops we would still only achieve 4% of the UK’s electricity – and where would we put the Welsh? -