Can Britain keep the lights on up to 2020 without building new polluting power stations?
This is possibly the most significant question facing this country. 2020 is a medium term date with some particular targets. First a related digression:
After my first blog I received the following email: 'You say the UK is currently in Europe only ahead of Malta and Luxembourg in adopting renewable energy. That's a very useful statistic. Do you have a reference for it please?'
Well, this perfectly illustrated the point I made at the end of my second blog. We have the power, in a way that has never before been available, of accessing all sorts of key resources, including scientific and government reports, and using it. In a search through my paper files I couldn't put my hands on the source, so I opened Google and typed in - 'renewable energy targets 2020'. I took one of the first choices 'The EU's target for Renewable Energy 20% by 2020'. This turned out to be the report of the House of Lords EU committee 2007-2008. There on pages 15 and 16, Table 1, were the full embarrassing facts - 3 columns: the countries, their percentages of renewable energy in 2005, and their agreed targets for 2020. I had not seen the full stark table before. These are the figures at the bottom of the scale for 2005: Malta 0%, Luxembourg 0.9%, UK 1.3%... and at the top: Sweden 39.8%, Latvia 34.9%, Finland 28.5%. Look at the table yourself. In the light of all the claims made by Tony Blair that we are world leaders in tackling climate change, and the way most people in Britain and even outside Britain believed him, these figures are mind bogglingly horrific.
Now I return to the question. Britain's legally binding commitment for 2020 is that 15% of our energy use has to be met from renewable energy sources. As we are talking about the total energy and a high proportion of renewable energy comes in the form of electricity, this equates to between 35% and 45% of electricity coming from renewable sources. This is a commitment that needs some fundamental policy changes, not just trite declarations.
If we are serious about it, then there need be no energy gap at 2020. In the period between now and 2020, several nuclear and coal powered plants reach the end of their active lives. They represent just under 30% of our present electricity capacity, below that of the renewable extras that should be coming on line. We also have to look at individual years. At the end of 2015 a group of coal fired stations has to be closed down because they breach higher emissions standards that will come into force then, so 2016 may be a difficult year.
To look at this properly, including projected change in demand, WWF and Greenpeace commissioned Poyry, Europe's leading energy consultants to examine the scenarios. Poyry reported on August 1st 2008. The Poyry report is on the net. It is quite difficult to read but its conclusions are clear. If no new coal or nuclear stations are built, there need be no energy gap up to 2020. However that isn't automatic. The government has to put in place stronger policies that encourage the renewable energy sector.
The dimension that I haven't covered so far is anticipated growth in demand. Poyry examines that. We have to embrace saving energy through energy efficiency measures and insulation so that we use less energy to achieve the same things. Poyry's study was before the recession. Energy demand has fallen with the recession and the government's plans for a flagship new coal station at Kingsnorth in Kent have receded again.
Still there are many distinguished establishment voices saying that we cannot manage without the big polluters.
We need to remember that the traditional advisers to the government are from those vested interests. It was back in 1982 that a parliamentary select committee advised only by the fossil fuel and nuclear industries, recommended that wave energy, in which Britain (particularly Scotland) was the world leader in development at that time, would be uneconomic. The government pulled the plug on all its wave energy research funding. This might have been the replacement industry for our declining ship yards. 27 years later the only commercial wave energy farm in the world today is off the coast of Portugal - built by a Scottish company. If you google a world map with wave energy contours, you will see that the west coast of Britain has the greatest wave energy potential of anywhere in the world next to a high population.
On Sunday 11th October 55 Greenpeace activists climbed onto the roof of the Palace of Westminster and put up banners saying: "Change the Politics, Save the Planet". This was designed to greet the MPs returning from their recess but, more importantly, to highlight the annual report of the Climate Change Committee that said that Britain needs a step change in its renewable energy, efficiency and insulation measures to get on target. Chairman, Lord Adair Turner said: "The government needs ... to put in place a comprehensive delivery framework. What we have proposed is achievable and affordable, but action needs to be taken now if we are to make our contribution to combating climate change." The full report is there on the net.
When you study these reports you start seeing the original question in a different light. The old polluting industries are a dangerous diversion. We need an undivided commitment to a clean energy future.
Gordon Brown has just said that we have 50 days to save the planet (The number of days before the crucial Copenhagen Climate Change Conference which will decide the replacement for the Kyoto Protocol).
You too can play your part. To steel the resolve of our delegates a huge peaceful rally will take place in London on Saturday 5th December. Coaches are going there from all over the North East. To see ways of joining go to the 'Make Poverty History North East' website or to 'Stop Climate Chaos Coalition, the Wave'.
In 2008 China built a wind turbine every 2 hours.



My feed
















Leave a comment