Tag Archives: friends
MEPs Approve Proposals To Reduce Biofuels Emissions
Influential Environment Committee backs cap on crop-based fuels and moves to include indirect emissions in EU directives By Will Nichols 11 Jul 2013 EU parliamentarians have approved proposals to limit the contribution of conventional biofuels toward its green transport targets, in a move producers labelled “complex and ineffective”. MEPs in the influential Environment Committee (ENVI) voted 43-26 – with one abstention – to set a cap for fuels made from food crops at 5.5 per cent and include emissions arising from indirect land use change (ILUC) factors such as clearing of forests, wetlands or grasslands in the Renewable Energy Directive and the Fuel Quality Directive when calculating official emissions impacts. The commission had already proposed a five per cent cap, roughly equating to current levels, but the EU Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE) said last month this should be raised to 6.5 per cent and recommended ILUC factors not be included until the methodology for measuring indirect emissions is more reliable . The cap is designed to accelerate the development of so-called second-generation biofuels, which derive from materials such as waste, agricultural residues or algae, which in theory do not compete with food production but have yet to reach industrial levels of production. The Committee approved proposals that such advanced biofuels should account for at least two per cent of overall consumption by 2020 and, to boost the market share of electric vehicles , electricity produced from renewable sources should also account for two per cent. Green groups have blamed biofuel production for rising food prices and point to a number of research papers that suggest ILUC emissions mean that some forms of biofuel, particular biodiesel made from palm or soybean oil, are worse for the environment than the petrol and diesel fuels they are designed to replace. However, producers argue the science around ILUC calculations is still in its infancy and that the EU should not undermine a £14bn industry on such a premise. Moreover, they argue there is a real threat the EU will not be able to meet its goal of using 10 per cent green energy in transport by 2020 by effectively ruling out 80 per cent of EU biofuels, and warn that by changing the goal posts the move could deter investors in next-generation fuels. Kåre Riis Nielsen, director of European affairs at Danish company Novozymes, which manufacturers enzymes for both first- and second-generation producers, branded the proposals “a complex and ineffective package”. He said the proposals in the ITRE report would be a better way of promoting the best performing biofuels while addressing ILUC issues in a “practical manner”. “Limiting the share of conventional biofuels to 5.5 per cent prevents further growth of the industry and ignores the strong contribution conventional ethanol makes to decarbonise the transport sector even when ILUC is accounted for,” Nielsen said in a statement. “The ENVI Committee has ignored the opinions provided by other Parliamentary Committees… that recommended a more balanced approach allowing conventional biofuels to develop sustainably while incentivising further innovative advanced biofuels. “Today’s vote fails to provide the needed long-term and stable policy framework for industry and investors and would jeopardise the future of best performing biofuels including advanced biofuels industry.” Kenneth Richter, biofuels campaigner at Friends of the Earth, gave the measures a cautious welcome, but argued that they represented a “timid step” when bolder action was required. “The introduction of ILUC factors is an important decision to ensure that only biofuels that benefit the climate are being supported,” he said. “But it’s disappointing that the committee has not set a trajectory for phasing out the use of food for fuel, but instead chose to cap it at a level that is even higher than current use. “It’s crucial that when the parliament’s plenary votes in September, it must not further water down the current proposal.” Giuseppe Nastasi of ClientEarth, was equally circumspect, arguing a five per cent cap is still too high to prevent ILUC emissions, “Moreover, MEPs voted to subsidise some advanced biofuels made from environmentally dangerous materials such as industrial and municipal waste (with the exception of a few waste streams), plus forestry and agricultural residues whose use endangers biodiversity and soil fertility,” he added. “This will have to be corrected by Parliament on 10th September.” However, Nusa Urbancic, clean fuels manager at campaign group Transport & Environment, said the proposals would promote the production of “genuinely emissions reducing transport fuels” including advanced biofuels and renewable electricity for electric vehicles. “It is encouraging to see that MEPs in charge of protecting our environment finally addressed the elephant in the room by fully accounting for indirect emissions in the EU biofuels policy. This vote will pave the way for truly sustainable transport fuels, which actually reduce emissions , as of 2020,” she said. “The full European Parliament now needs to uphold in September the science-based decision made by the Environment Committee. Otherwise, public support worth at least €10bn a year will continue to be wasted on harmful biofuels that in many cases pollute twice as much as conventional fuels.” Continue reading
GIB Invests £20 Million In Biomass
30 July 2013 by Emma Leedham See an enlarged version of this infographic The construction of a wood-fuelled combined heat and power (CHP) station in Londonderry, Northern Ireland, was given the go ahead yesterday (29 July), after the Foresight Group and the UK Green Investment Bank plc (GIB) invested £20 million into the £81 million project. The investment has enabled the Evermore Renewable Energy CHP to be built on a ten-acre site at the Londonderry Port and Harbour Commissioners land at Lisahally. The project is forecast to be the largest renewable energy project in Northern Ireland, and is expected to operate from 2015 to 2035. According to the GIB, the 15.8 megawatt project – its first investment in Northern Ireland – will increase renewable electricity generation in the country by around 10 per cent, and deliver a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of around 3.7 million tonnes. Partner funders include GCP Infrastructure Fund Ltd, Burmeister & Wain Scandinavian Contractor A/S (BWSC), Investec Bank, and Eksport Kredit Fonden. Project details The CHP project, led by Evermore Renewable Energy (a subsidiary of the Evermore Group, founded in 2009) aims to supply enough renewable electricity to power more than 25,000 homes each year, create 200 construction jobs and over 20 full time jobs once in operation. Speaking of the project, Ciaran and Stephen Devine, co-founders of the Evermore Group commented: “We are making a serious commitment to the Northern Ireland energy market. Working with the best partners in technology, fuel supply and financing, we hope to show that Northern Ireland is a great place to do business so that further inward investment will follow. “This is the culmination of many years of hard work to develop and finance the largest green energy power station in Northern Ireland. Our ability to attract this level of investment into Northern Ireland is testament to our team’s commitment and skill in both project development and project financing. This now marks the start of the construction phase and with that the creation of over 200 much needed construction jobs in the North West.” They added that work should begin on the project in the ‘next six to eight weeks’. ‘Landmark moment’ for GIB Speaking of the investment, Shaun Kingsbury, Chief Executive of the UK Green Investment Bank, said: “[This] announcement will substantially increase Northern Ireland’s renewable energy capacity. Not only will the project save the same amount of carbon as taking around 77,000 cars off the road, it will also make use of over two million tonnes of wood, a valuable energy resource that would otherwise have gone to landfill.” The recycled wood (largely recovered from the construction and demolition industry) will be supplied under a fuel contract with Stobart Biomass Products Limited. Provision is being made to use up to 30 per cent of local wood biomass. Business Secretary Vince Cable said: “The first deal done in Northern Ireland is a landmark moment for the UK Green Investment Bank and I’m confident that there will be more to come.” Northern Ireland’s Energy Minister Arlene Foster added: “The Evermore plant will make an important contribution towards Northern Ireland’s 2020 renewable energy targets. “It is a wonderful example of local, national and international co-operation and I am particularly pleased to note that this is the first Northern Ireland project to secure funding from the Green Investment Bank.” The investment comes from the UK Waste Resources & Energy Fund (UKWREI), managed by investment management company Foresight, in which the GIB is the cornerstone investor. L aunched in November 2012 , the Green Investment Bank was given £3.8 billion of funding from the UK Government to support environmentally-friendly projects that cannot obtain sufficient funding from the markets. The GIB provides investment for renewable and low-carbon technologies such as offshore wind, energy from waste, non-domestic energy efficiency as well as biofuels for transport, biomass power, carbon capture and storage, marine energy and renewable heat projects. ‘Temporary solution’ Despite the GIB investment, Secretary of State for Energy Security Edward Davey has previously told the BBC that biomass was a temporary solution to meet climate targets while renewable energy systems were being developed. Indeed, government recently announced that grants for existing biomass plants are being capped at 400 megawatts (MW), and that there will be no renewable heat incentive (RHI) tariffs for new biomass plants. “Making electricity from biomass based on imported wood is not a long-term answer to our energy needs – I am quite clear about that”, he said. Biomass ‘dirtier than coal’ Biomass has been a controversial choice of renewable energy, with a joint report by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace, titled ‘ Dirtier than Coal ‘ , suggesting that biomass derived from virgin wood may be more polluting than coal. Indeed, the government’s own statistics suggest that burning whole trees can result in 49 per cent more emissions than burning coal. Harry Huyton, RSPB Head of Climate Policy, explained: “When trees are burnt in power stations, CO2 [carbon dioxide] comes out of the chimney, just like it does when you burn coal. The difference is that the wood is less energy dense and is wetter than coal, so it takes a lot more energy to harvest, transport, process, and finally burn it. “Government has justified burning trees in power stations by claiming the chimney emissions are offset by the carbon that the forest takes in when it regrows after being harvested, but this is misleading. It can take decades, if not centuries, for the trees to recapture that carbon, leaving us with more emissions in the atmosphere now – when we least need it.” Continue reading
Renewable Energy: Burning US Trees In UK Power Stations
By Roger Harrabin Environment analyst, Georgia, US How American trees end up being burned in UK power stations Swamp forests in the US are being felled to help keep the lights on in the UK. Is this really the best way to combat climate change? Environmentalists are trying to block the expansion of a transatlantic trade bringing American wood to burn in European power stations. The trade is driven by EU rules promoting renewable energy to combat climate change. Many millions of tonnes of wood pellets will soon be shipped annually to help keep the lights on in the UK. Other EU nations may follow. Critics say subsidising wood burning wastes money, does nothing to tackle climate change in the short term, and is wrecking some of the finest forests in the US. I have tracked the controversial trade from the swamp forests of North Carolina to the towering chimneys of the UK’s biggest power station, Drax in Yorkshire, which is converting half its boilers from coal to wood. The implications are complicated and disputed, but it is clear that EU leaders did not have burning American wood in mind when they mandated that 20% of Europe’s energy should come from “renewable” sources. Trees rejected by plantations had found a new market in power stations Environmentalists are preoccupied with the potential effects of the trade on climate change and wildlife. So I travelled with Drax representatives to a timber operation in southern Georgia run by their main supplier, the timber firm Plum Creek. It is the biggest private landowner in the US. Its operations are impressive, from the large-scale nurseries selectively breeding seedlings for vigour and disease-resistance, through to immensely productive plantations. This is among the most effective tree farming in the world. Competition from weeds is eliminated in dark monocrop tree stands where wildlife is scanty. How clean is wood-burning? Drax will burn seven million tonnes of plant material a year. It will have to import 90% of its biomass, mostly from the US. From 2013, the UK Government mandates that biomass burning for power will need to emit no more than 70g CO2/kJ, including emissions from transport and cutting. Drax says it averages 20-75g CO2/kJ. That compares 280g for the average UK coal power station; 122g for North Sea gas; and 193g for Russian piped gas. The government expects subsidy for biomass to be £442m-£736m in 2016/17. Sources: Environment Agency and Friends of the Earth The plantations are thinned and harvested by mechanical giants which cut and throw whole trees as if they were twigs. The trees are planted close to each other to encourage tall straight specimens to reach for the light. These will have most value for planks. As the plantation grows, some trees are removed to make space. The thinned-out trees are of low value. They are traditionally sold to the pulp and paper industry but now there’s a new market – power stations in the UK. The industry contends there is plenty of low-grade material to source pulp and power, but some studies suggest that this may be wishful thinking. Critics fear that increasing demand from power generators will encourage foresters to take land that is currently growing food. Their other fear is that plantation forests will replace even more of the natural forests of the southern US, which are already dwindling fast. Environmentalist Derb Carter shows Roger Harrabin swamp trees in Georgia I drove with environmentalists at dawn to a gorgeous swamp forest in North Carolina. The birdsong was entrancing, and a scarce prothonatory warbler – known as the swamp canary – danced before our TV lens. The wood fuel industry has not advertised that it also takes trees from natural forests like this to boil kettles in Britain – but that’s what happens. Most of the swamp forests in south-east US are in the hands of small private landowners and they face few restrictions on what they do with their assets. It is said that local landowners cut their forest twice; once when their daughter gets married and once when they retire. Cutting typically means clear-cutting, and that leaves some left-over, low-value trees for pulp or power. A mountain of wood chips will end up burning in a UK power station So is the environmentalist argument really against the power industry? Or against America’s laws on forest biodiversity? It depends, of course, on how much the power industry expands. But the best way of protecting the forests may be for benefactors to buy them, because those wedding dresses will still need to be paid for. The other big environmental issue is climate change. When the EU set its 2020 target of sourcing 20% of energy from renewables, some leaders thought the deal referred to electricity. (I know because I spoke to Downing Street on the day of the decision). In fact, it included energy for transport and heating too, so the bar was set much higher than anticipated. Policies create opportunities and entrepreneurs were quick to exploit the potential of wood power, which will soon create more renewable energy in the UK than wind and solar combined. Roger Harrabin visited Drax power station in December 2012 as it prepares to burn more wood and other biomass instead of coal But will this achieve the stated goal of cutting carbon emissions? The British government will shortly announce its rules for the sustainability of “biomass” burning for power. It will set a standard for emissions created from the cutting, drying and shipping and timber but it will make a working assumption that burning the wood has nil CO2 emissions as new trees will suck up the CO2 emitted by wood burning. Critics say this is simplistic as it fails to recognise that it will take maybe 50 years for new trees to absorb the CO2, whilst politicians agree that emissions need to be cut immediately to prevent carbon over-heating the planet. It also fails to account for the fact that in the US the forest stock has been increasing and this process offsets the growth in carbon emissions from homes and industry. Burning American trees in the UK reduces America’s “carbon sink”. Foresters argue that this doesn’t matter much as long as the total biomass sent for export is no greater than the wood used in a single large pulp mill. But these numbers will grow fast. Liberal Democrat MP Nick Harvey has tabled an amendment to the UK Energy Bill insisting that long-term subsidies for biomass burning should only be agreed for plants that capture and store CO2 emissions, or use the waste heat for other purposes. (Drax alone expects subsidies of more than £1bn in coming years from people’s electricity bills.) But the amendment is not supported by any of the major parties. It looks as though UK Government policy is being driven by the need to hit mandatory targets and keep electrons flowing, rather than by a deep desire to cut CO2 emissions right now. Continue reading