Financial and business news and articles
Posts tagged Energy
£3bn coal power plant will test strength of Ed Miliband’s environment rules
Mar 12th
New plant in Scotland will have to prove that carbon capture technology works
The first application to build a coal plant in Britain since energy secretary Ed Miliband introduced tough new environmental rules will be submitted next week, the Guardian has learnt.
UK-based conglomerate Peel Group is pressing ahead with the £3bn project to build a 1.6GW plant at Hunterston in Scotland, which will partially fit experimental carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. Its former partner, Dong Energy, dropped out last year, citing the recession. The application, which is expected to be submitted to the Scottish government on Monday, signals Peel’s confidence that the unproven technology can work.
Hunterston is likely to become the UK’s first CCS plant, ahead of the controversial Kingsnorth project in Kent, which E.ON still hopes to build.
Miliband announced that Kingsnorth, and Scottish Power’s project at Longannet, will move into the final stage of a government-funded competition to build what it had said would be the UK’s first pilot CCS plant. But no winner will be announced until next year, making Peel’s project the most advanced. The technology is supposed to allow coal plants, which emit twice as much carbon as gas plants, to capture and store their emissions underground, but the technology has not been proven on a large scale and the government is relying on it working to meet its carbon targets.
Last year Miliband announced a radical new policy to force all new coal plants to be partially fitted with carbon capture technology. The government hopes the technology will be technically and commercially proven by 2025, by when all existing plants that have partially fitted the technology would have to use it to capture and store all emissions. But ministers have not spelt out what happens if the technology does not work or cannot be fitted to the whole plant. Environmental groups such as Greenpeace are concerned that if this happens, plants like Hunterston built under the new policy will remain open and end up emitting vast amounts of carbon dioxide.
Greenpeace has campaigned for an “emissions performance standard” which would restrict the operation of coal plants that had not fully fitted the technology. A coalition of Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and rebel Labour MPs narrowly failed to include the provision in the government’s energy bill in a recent vote.
Joss Garman, climate campaigner at Greenpeace UK, said: “This application is a worrying sign that the government has failed to shut the door completely on dirty coal in the UK. Despite huge uncertainties over their ability to pay for carbon capture and storage technology, [Peel subsidiary] Ayrshire Power has decided to go ahead with these plans and call Labour’s bluff.
“It will take a brave minister to shut down a functioning plant in the future, even if it has failed to deliver the clean coal technology it promised in 2010. That’s why an emissions performance standard is needed from the start, to warn companies they face tough legal consequences if they fail to keep their promises.”
Peel Group, which is backed by Saudi investors, owns airports, ports and a 28% stake in UK Coal. It is run by John Whittaker, 28th in last year’s Sunday Times Rich List with £1.3bn.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Love thy neighbour – pool your energy bills, says Labour
Mar 12th
General election manifesto to encourage creation of community co-ops for getting good deals on insulation and solar panels
Home owners will be encouraged to club together to negotiate discounts from their energy bills under plans to be put forward in Labour’s general election manifesto.
Such community energy co-operatives could also be used to get good deals on insulatiing properties and renewable energy devices such as solar panels or wind turbines.
Labour will not pledge money for the idea, but will offer to set up an advisory service to support groups. No target will be set, but a Labour source said there could eventually be “several thousand” such projects. In the US there are 900 similar schemes involving 42m people.
Ed Miliband, the climate secretary, said: “One of the most exciting things happening in the energy field at the moment is the formation of energy co-ops – local people banding together to get cheaper energy bills by buying electricity in bulk and discounts on energy efficiency measures such as home insulation.
“The government has already provided funding for some of these groups through our Low Carbon Communities Challenge Fund. But now I want Labour’s manifesto to commit to establishing a support service so that more energy co-ops can be formed and more people can benefit from their services.”
Energy co-operatives already exist in the UK, though they are mostly organised to invest in renewable power or mass insulation and share the profits from selling the electricity or energy savings, rather than push for reduced bills. Labour’s idea builds on a report from the Co-operative Party, published last year, which suggested more consumer groups could be set up to emulate the success of those in US and Europe. One scheme in Belgium has about 15,000 members.
Based on overseas schemes, the report estimates consumers could save up to 10% – or about £100 a year – on their annual bills by using “collective power” to negotiate better deals with suppliers or direct with generators.
Those groups could then club together to pay for insulation, and following that build combined heat and power units, for example burning biomass, or put up renewable energy such as solar panels on roofs or even commercial wind turbines. These could in turn provide clean energy and possible generate profit from selling surplus electricity back to the National Grid, said Michael Stephenson, the party’s general secretary.
“Firstly you can save even more money – the more control you have, obviously the more money you can save,” said Stephenson. “If you’re saving carbon, you’re saving energy which means you’re saving money off your bills. [But] a lot of reasons why local communities are working to get this off the ground is because they want to tackle climate change as well.
“We can see this as a potentially massive player in the energy market.”
As well as the obvious appeal of lower energy bills – especially with Ofgem warning bills could rise 25% by 2020 – and pressure from most rival parties including the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to announce clear policies on the environment, Labour is understood to be attracted to the benefits of co-operatives in improving community links.
However the lack of any new funds to support the scheme will raise concerns that many community groups will not be able to afford the up-front cost of investing in efficiency or renewable power. There will also be questions about whether power companies will pass on the price cuts to the new groups, in the form of higher bills to other customers.
Stephenson said experience in the banking sector suggested they would not: in countries with a strong mutual (customer-owned) banking sector all banks tended to make lower profits out of their retail customers, said Stephenson. “It tends to have a civilizing influence on the market, rather than driving people the other way,” he added.
Simon Roberts of the Centre for Sustainable Energy charity, which oversees a network of community energy groups in Somerset, said co-operatives would need advice on which technology to use in their area, likely costs, procurement and how to develop the structure of the organisation, especially if they needed to employ staff later to manage projects.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Academics demand independent inquiry into new nuclear reactors
Mar 11th
• Lobby consists of 90 academics, politicians and experts
• Claim appropriate information has not been made available
Pressure on the government to organise an independent inquiry into a new generation of nuclear power stations will intensify today with a call for action from a group of 90 high-ranking academics, politicians and technical experts.
The huge lobby says the “climategate” email scandal and other events have shaken public trust in the scientific governance of environmental risk, making a wider assessment of nuclear power more important than ever.
Paul Dorfman, an energy policy research fellow at Warwick University who has been coordinating support for an inquiry, said more debate was needed for a decision on nuclear to have full democratic backing. “The kind of consultation we have had so far has been flawed and inadequate. The government has put the cart before the horse by wanting endorsement before either the design of the reactor and the way waste will be treated has been decided. There is a democratic deficit here that needs correcting,” he said.
Nuclear consulting engineer John Large, another campaign signatory, agreed. “The public consultation has been a failure because the appropriate information has not been made available for the public to make a proper assessment of the benefits and risks,” he said.
“We need Ed Miliband [the energy and climate change secretary] to organise an independent inquiry as he is entitled to do under the justification regulations,” he added.
These two critics are standing alongside a long list of academics, such as Jerome Ravetz of Oxford University and Mark Pelling of King’s College London, as well as MPs including Simon Hughes of the Liberal Democrats, Michael Meacher from Labour and Jane Davidson, the environment minister in the Welsh assembly.
A “justification” process is a requirement under European Union law but Miliband will himself be able to decide whether he needs an inquiry or not. He is believed to want to take this step as soon as possible so that new nuclear power stations could come on stream in 2017, in time to meet an expected energy shortage.
The Department of Energy and Climate Change was unable to comment on the matter last night.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
In pictures: Curse of the Black Gold: 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta
Mar 10th
Curse of the Black Gold: 50 Years of Oil in the Niger Delta by the photojournalist Ed Kashi documents the consequences of 50 years of oil extraction in the Niger delta
Feed-in tariff ‘killing off’ burgeoning UK small turbine industry
Mar 10th
RenewableUK says inconsistencies in tariff favour solar panels, which takes microgeneration business out of UK
UK small wind turbine manufacturers say they will lose out to foreign solar panel manufacturers in the race to cash in on the UK government’s new feed-in tariff scheme.
They claim their products will be penalised because solar panel owners will receive higher government subsidies than wind turbine buyers. As the arrangement stands, a wind turbine would qualify for 26.7-34.5p per KWh in government subsidies, while solar panels would typically bring in 41p per KWh.
Turbine manufacturers will also have to pay a fee of up to £100,000 to have their models certified for the scheme, and they argue that planning rules make it harder for customers to get approval for turbines.
Due to come into effect on 1 April, the tariff – also known as Clean Energy Cashback – will offer home owners a government subsidy for installing small-scale renewable energy technologies, including solar panels and wind turbines.
Alex Murley, RenewableUK’s head of small systems, said: “Small wind is the only microgeneration technology which UK manufacturers dominate the market for. If we don’t get this right we could be shooting ourselves in the foot and killing off a burgeoning UK success story.”
According to Renewable UK, planning applications for small wind turbines have traditionally taken up to 14 months to process. Britain’s oldest surviving small wind manufacturer, Ampair, has accused some local authorities of “systematically rejecting” applications.
The government promises to allow households to install small turbines without planning permission from June, but turbine manufacturers say the current planning allowance is too limited, restricting domestic wind turbines to a hub height of 10 metres and 2.2 metres blade diameter.
This will allow a 1.5KW turbine, producing an average of 800KWh a year in windy conditions – less than a fifth of the average UK household’s electricity needs. By comparison, UK panel installer Solarcentury has estimated that the typical 18 metre square domestic solar panel installation would on average generate just over 2,000KWh – nearly half the average household’s electricity consumption.
The government’s Energy Saving Trust said that although such limitations are fine for urban roof top turbines, wind turbines in rural locations need to be bigger for small wind turbines to generate a significant amount of energy for the UK. It is these rural locations that will generate the lion’s share of energy from “small” turbines. EST figures published last year show small turbines could meet 4% of the UK’s electricity demands but only 4% of that energy would come from small turbines in urban locations.
UK manufacturers currently produce four-fifths of the country’s small turbines, 3,500 of which were installed in the UK in 2008. All larger wind turbines and the vast majority of solar panels are manufactured abroad.
David Sharman, managing director of Ampair, claims the UK government is penalising its own manufacturing industry through inequalities in the feed-in tariff.
He also claims that the rigorous tests to qualify for the tariff’s quality assurance certificate, the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS), are prohibitively expensive at at £50,000-£100,000 per product certified. No small wind turbines have so far been MCS accreditedbut the government has set up an MCS ‘transition list’ for small wind turbines, which allows them to temporarily qualify for the tariff for one year while they complete the accreditation scheme.
Responding to criticism of planning restrictions for wind, a spokesperson for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: “We consulted on the proposals to find the right balance for these technologies. We want to enable homeowners to install microgeneration easily and also make sure we’re fair about planning permission for larger installations. Different homes will be suitable for different technologies based on a number of factors – it’s not a one size fits all.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
UK Coal gets £350m merger proposal
Mar 9th
Deal with resources group Hargreaves Services would transform coal industry
UK Coal and resources group Hargreaves Services are weighing up a £350m merger which would transform the coal industry, the Guardian has learned.
UK Coal, the UK’s last major coal producer, announced today that it had received a merger approach from an unnamed third party. The company is keen to reduce its reliance on its deep mines, which are expensive to maintain and have suffered production problems leading to large losses. UK Coal shares closed up more than 12% today.
It is understood that property and transport firm Peel Group, which owns 28% of UK Coal, is being kept fully informed of developments. The merger plan is still tentative and even if both sides proceed with the plan, they are understood to be some way from putting a formal agreement to shareholders. Neither company commented last night.
Hargreaves Services owns a deep mine in Maltby, South Yorkshire, which it bought from UK Coal, and is soon to start open cast mining. It also manufactures metallurgical coke and solid fuel such as briquettes used in barbecues. The company also runs a transport division and an industrial services division mainly handling fuel on behalf of power station owners in the UK. With a market value about a quarter more than UK Coal, it is likely that Hargreaves Services would be the senior partner in any merger.
UK Coal has embarked on an expensive project to upgrade its coal mines. But it has struggled in recent years because of the fall in coal prices following the economic slowdown and writedowns in its property portfolio. Its 43,000 acre portfolio is mainly located around disused collieries which have been earmarked for housing and light industrial redevelopment schemes and is a significant source of potential income. It reported losses of £80m in the first six months of last year, including a near £60m writedown in the value of its property portfolio. It also reported a rise in net debt to £191m, prompting urgent talks with its lenders.
In September UK Coal raised £100m via a rights issue to see it through the next couple of years. Next year, it should start to see the benefits of higher production rates from its mines and higher property values. The company has also struggled for some years with long term supply contracts which have forced it to sell coal below market rates to large customers such as Drax. The last of these contracts will expire next year.
UK Coal is Britain’s largest producer of coal, supplying around 6% of the country’s energy needs for electricity generation. It has four deep mines in operation, employing 3,100 people. Eight years ago it owned 13. It is looking to expand its surface mines, which produced around 1.7m tonnes of coal a year in 2008. They are cheaper to run but are opposed by many local communities.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
The ‘waterless’ washing machine that could save you money
Mar 9th
New machine by Xeros cleans clothes with beads and a tiny amount of water and may cut household bills by 30%
“Dry” cleaning is set to become a domestic activity with a washing machine that uses 90% less water than a normal laundry cycle and could be available by the end of 2011. The device, developed by Leeds-based Xeros Ltd, replaces water with tiny plastic beads that suck up stains and its producers claim it will shift stubborn pounds from household energy bills as well.
The Xeros process uses 3mm-long nylon beads that can get into all the crevices and folds of clothing and can also be re-used hundreds of times. The beads flood the machine’s drum once the clothes are wet and the humidity is at the right level. After the washing cycle is complete, the beads drain away in the same way as water in a conventional machine.
The chief executive of Xeros, Bill Westwater, said: “The net saving in water, detergent and electricity and including the cost of the beads, we calculate, is about a 30% cost saving for the user.” He claims the machine has been tested successfully on a range of fabrics stained with everything from mud, red wine and curry stains to ink from ballpoint pens.
According to the Energy Saving Trust, just under one-third of household energy is used to heat water. Laundry washing also accounts for 15% of all household water consumption; meaning if everyone in the UK converted from normal washing to the Xeros system, the carbon emissions saved would be the equivalent of taking 1.4 m cars off the roads. Another perk of the device is that it should allow many delicates to be “dry” cleaned at home.
Xeros has already received research and development funding from Yorkshire Forward and has just returned from a government-sponsored “Clean and Cool” trade mission to the United States, aimed at securing investment from venture capitalists in Silicon Valley in California.
The idea for polymer-based cleaning came from Stephen Burkinshaw, a polymer chemist at Leeds University who spent 30 years working out how to improve the dyeing of plastics used in fabrics. A few years ago he realised that the stains on clothes acted in a similar way to dyes, and he wondered if he could use plastics to attract away the stains.
After experimenting with a range of plastics, he settled on nylon. Thanks to a natural property of the material, nylon beads attract stains to their surface and, in 100% humidity, the molecular structure of the plastic becomes amorphous, so the stains diffuse into the centre of the beads. “Not only are you able to suck the stain off the clothes, you’re also able to ensure there’s no deposition back onto the clothes,” said Westwater.
When the beads are at the end of their life, saturated with dirt and stains, they can be collected and recycled into, for example, dashboards for cars. Eventually Westwater wants to design a closed-loop recycling system for his washing machines, where saturated beads can be refreshed and re-used in Xeros machines.
Westwater has already built a prototype washing machine and aims to have a product ready for the commercial laundry market by the end of next year, with a consumer version coming to market shortly afterwards. “There is more of a technical challenge [in development] as you compact the system. But it’s not just about that – there’s also consumer inertia. For millenia, people have been washing their clothes with water and a bit of detergent and suddenly we’re coming along and saying that most of that water can be replaced by these beads. That’s a big leap in the consumers’ minds.”
Claire Cunningham, a spokesperson for the government-backed Technology Strategy Board, said Xeros had an “interesting and innovative product” and the environmental and financial savings were of particular interest when it was selected to take part, along with the 18 other British clean technology companies, in the Clean and Cool trade mission.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Vehicle scrappage scheme drives down emissions of new cars
Mar 9th
Average carbon emissions of new cars reduced by 5.4% in 2009 as drivers trade in their old car for cleaner models
The average emissions from a new car dropped at the fastest rate in 13 years last year because of the UK government’s “cash for bangers” vehicle scrappage scheme, it was announced today.
On average, new cars emitted 149.5g of CO2 per kilometre in 2009 – a 5.4% reduction on the average 2008 figure, according to a report from the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT). This was the best year-on-year improvement since the SMMT began to keep records of this kind in 1997.
SMMT chief executive Paul Everitt said the scrappage scheme was a key contributor to the lower emission figure last year.
The average emissions of cars bought through the scheme was 133.3g per kilometre, which was 26.8% below the average of the vehicle being scrapped (182.3g/km). Average new car emissions are down from nearly 190g/km in 1999 to below 150g/km last year, a cut of 21.2%.
Everitt said:
“The industry is well on its way to meeting EU regulatory targets of a 130g/km fleet average by 2015, but the current rate of improvement must be maintained.”
“Building consumer awareness and delivering effective mechanisms to influence buying behaviour through a long-term environmental tax regime, and the government’s recent ultra-low carbon incentive scheme, will become increasingly important.” Last month the Guardian revealed that only two electric cars – an £87,000 sports car and £25,000 four-seater Mitsubishi – would be available from the start of the ultra-low carbon incentive scheme.
The Mini sector had the lowest average emissions last year – dropping 6.7% to 115.6g/km. Luxury car models – which averaged 250.3g/km last year – were the worst pollutants, although emissions in this sector were down 6% on 2008.
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
Letters: Firm support for renewable future
Mar 8th
We are very concerned by your report of a possible delay to the introduction of the feed-in tariff scheme due to problems preparing the legislation, and we urge the government to do everything it can to ensure the scheme starts on time next month (Feed-in tariff delay alarms energy sector, 4 March).
However, it is inaccurate to say that criticism of the government’s feed-in tariff scheme has traditionally been limited to groups opposed to wind or solar power. We campaigned for a UK feed-in tariff to support small-scale renewable electricity – and welcome its introduction – but we have always demanded that the final scheme must be accessible to the fuel poor and low-income communities.
While the increase in solar photovoltaic (PV) tariffs that we called for has now brought this technology within reach of social landlords, much more must be done to ensure that low-income groups benefit from the reduced electricity bills local renewable energy can bring.
The scheme must also be reformed to give other technologies the welcome support it will deliver to small-scale solar PV and wind power. Anaerobic digestion, community wind projects, sustainable biomass generation and river hydro schemes all deserve a better deal.
Greater support for small-scale renewable energy is vital, but so is a huge increase in the resources for domestic energy-efficiency measures. Both are essential to deliver energy security, cut carbon emissions and tackle fuel poverty.
• So George Monbiot thinks solar PV panels are a mere fashion accessory that at this latitude produce risible amounts of electricity, does he (Comment, 2 March)? Here in Sheffield our modest array of panels generated 2067kWh last year – just short of the 2183kWh of electricity consumed by our three-person household. In addition to saving 1,172kg of CO2 emissions we no longer have to pay for electricity and, even before the introduction of a feed-in tariff, look forward each time a “bill” arrives to the net income we receive for the electricity we “export” to the grid. Based on our experience, solar electricity offers a far more effective and constructive solution to the problems of global warming and finite fossil-fuel resources than the hugely expensive and environmentally harmful nuclear option Monbiot appears to favour.
Jim Dignan
Sheffield
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds
BNFL memoir revives nuclear safety fears
Mar 7th
• Ex-industry boss sheds light on Sellafield panic
• Greenpeace calls for fresh review of atomic industry
The autobiography of a former director of British Nuclear Fuels (BNFL) is likely to reignite fears about the safety of nuclear power, as Britain prepares for a new generation of reactors, by exposing the panic that rocked the industry two decades ago when a link was suggested between radiation and childhood leukaemia.
At its height, workers at Sellafield were advised not to have children, while bosses at the Cumbrian nuclear complex even proposed establishing a sperm bank or calling for “radiation volunteers” from among older workers in order to reduce levels of exposure for workers of child-bearing age.
The Tenth Child, by Harold Bolter, a former chairman of the Nuclear Industry Association, reveals the extent of concern within the industry following a damaging report into clusters of illness around the Cumbrian reprocessing facility in the 1990s. It comes as Britain prepares to build up to half a dozen nuclear power stations, some of them possibly sited in that area.
Greenpeace said last night that there should be a major review of nuclear plants before any decision was made to construct new ones. Ben Ayliffe, senior energy campaigner, said: “The nuclear industry has a long history of evasion and dishonesty … Greenpeace is reviving its call for a public inquiry into all impacts of nuclear power – including health effects.”
Bolter, a former BNFL director, describes as a “public relations disaster” comments by Roger Berry, then director of health and safety at the company, that some staff at Sellafield should make sacrifices to protect the health of future generations following a study by Professor Martin Gardner, published in 1990, that had suggested a link between external radiation received by male staff at Sellafield and the development of cancer among their children.
Pressed for a response to the report, Berry told reporters: “It may be that the proper advice is if you are so worried then maybe you do not have a family.” He is also said to have earlier suggested that the company establish a sperm bank or called for “radiation volunteers” from among older workers.
Bolter says he publicly repudiated Berry’s comments, claiming they were not company policy and promising BNFL would offer medical counselling to Sellafield staff.
“Once again, I had been forced to make company policy on the hoof, as it were, under pressure,” Bolter writes in his book. “There was no time to consult anyone or to get approval. I didn’t know what the chief executive or chairman’s reaction would be, although I was sure Roger Berry wouldn’t like what I said.” He goes on: “Roger Berry felt badly let down. I tried to explain to him that what I’d said was the only way to protect the company – and probably his career as wellfor that matter.”
BNFL, which has now been dismantled, handed over management of Sellafield to a group of private contractors including Areva of France.
The book has been published just as Britain prepares to build a new generation of atomic power plants for the first time in 30 years in an attempt to improve energy security and help beat climate change. The debate around the risk of nuclear power to public health gradually died down, partly as a result of a test case in the high court where BNFL was cleared of causing cancers in two women whose fathers had worked at Sellafield.
But more recently the issue has again been raised by government-funded research, known as the KiKK study, which appeared to show an increased risk of cancer in children under five years living near nuclear power plants in Germany.
Janine Allis-Smith, one of the women who took BNFL to court after her son contracted leukaemia, said last night the Bolter book and the KiKK study demanded a wider debate in Britain.
“With the government about to embark on a series of new nuclear power stations – including in Cumbria – it is time this health issue was properly looked at again. I have been trying to raise it for many years but it has just been pushed under the carpet again and again,” she argued.
“Many people in this area [Cumbria] do not want to know because they want to retain their jobs at Sellafield. Comare [the committee looking into radiation and public health] is working on a report but it may not be out before the go-ahead is given for new plants, which I think is appalling.”
Dr Ian Fairlie, an independent consultant who is writing a book on radiation risks and who has previously advised government departments, said the KiKK report was authoritative as it had been commissioned by the German government and its findings had been verified by them.He said: “In my view, the KiKK report is a showstopper for the government’s plans for more nuclear power stations. It’s impossible to justify killing children near nuclear power plants: there are many safer ways to generate electricity.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds