Tag Archives: power
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
Drax Launches State Of The Art Biomass Rail Freight Wagon
29 July 2013 Drax: rolls out state of the art biomass rail freight wagon Drax has unveiled the UK’s first purpose-built biomass rail freight wagon at the National Railway Museum in York. Developed by designers at Lloyd’s Register Rail and manufactured by WH Davis, it is the largest ever produced and “pushes the boundaries of rail engineering”, according to Drax. The wagon will transport sustainable biomass from the Ports of Tyne, Hull and Immingham to Drax Power Station, near Selby for use in generating low carbon, cost effective, and reliable renewable electricity. The supersize wagon has a capacity of 116 cubic metres allowing a biomass load weighing 71.6 tonnes. Its volume is almost 30 per cent bigger than any freight wagon currently used in the UK. Peter Emery, Drax’s production director said: “Our transformation to become one of Europe’s largest renewable generators through the use of sustainable biomass means we need new, bigger and better rail wagons. “We need to keep the biomass dry, move more of it and speed up the process of delivery. The finished product is an industry-leading design and fulfils all the criteria we set. We may be launching it in a museum but this wagon is no museum piece and will not be surpassed for many years to come.” Work on two prototypes began in January 2013 and presented the design engineers with a number of challenges in achieving the increased wagon capacity within the limits of the Network Rail loading gauge. Drax has ordered 200 wagons that are part of an investment of up to £700 million by including boiler modifications and new biomass receipt, storage and handling facilities at Drax Power Station, as well as developments further upstream in the biomass supply chain. The power station’s first biomass converted generating unit began operating in April; a second will follow next year and a third by 2016 depending on securing contracts for sufficient biomass supplies. Each will burn approximately 2.3 million tonnes of sustainable biomass a year. The new wagon will be on display at the National Railway Museum, York from 26 July to 12 August. Source: Utility Week Continue reading
Carbon Capture and Storage: Is There a Future?
And is it all about the money? M.J. Huijbers LLM EHS Consultant Enhesa Carbon dioxide emission reduction is moving to the forefront of priorities in many jurisdictions to combat climate change and maintain environmental stability. In the European Union, the major goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95% compared to the 1990 levels in all 28 Member States by 2050. In the European Commission’s view, it is not enough that industries reduce their greenhouse gas (including carbon) emissions to achieve this aim. The Commission is stressing that carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) should also be used as a mechanism. What is CCS? CCS is a process that allows carbon dioxide from large point source installations to be captured, compressed and injected into and stored underground in geological formations to prevent it from being released into the atmosphere. Currently, CCS is not actively taking place in the European Union. Many reasons like social acceptability, cost and infrastructural needs that are not yet in place cause overall scepticism. Therefore, there is a concern for the future for carbon capture and storage in Europe. The following will discuss the issues around CCS and whether it is an appropriate way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions within Europe. Problems that CCS is facing Finance Cost is the initial problem. Currently, it is more profitable for companies to buy emission allowances under the EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS), which cost approximately €3 per tonne of CO2, while for CCS the price is approximately €30-100 per tonne of CO2. In addition, the funding provided under the New Entrance Reserve 300 (NER300) and the European Energy Programme (EEPR) needs the co-funding of public authorities in order to launch CCS demonstration projects. No such projects have started yet. Further, as CCS has not yet started in the European Union, no infrastructure is yet in place. Social Another problem is public opposition against carbon dioxide storage onshore. A good example is the Dutch Barendrecht case, where storage of CO2 under land would take place, was not carried out, as it was not socially accepted. The reason the project did not take place, was that civilians felt uncomfortable about having carbon stored under their land and the dangers linked to this storage. Still the decision was taken to store carbon under the land of these civilians and they felt that the decision was taken without them. In addition, scientists did not agree on whether carbon storage under land was considered to be safe and the local government opposed against the project while the national government was in favour of the project. Policies and legislation The final problem relates to current policies and legislation already in place. Under Directive 2009/31/EC on CCS, the storage company is, at least for 20 years, responsible for this storage. After those 20 years, once the CO2 storage is stable, the Member State government will take over this responsibility. However, storage companies do not want to be responsible for 20 years, because of the extensive period with which they will be liable. It should be noted that companies that capture and transport the carbon dioxide are exempted from this responsibility. Also, under the London Protocol, carbon dioxide cannot be stored underwater, because it is classified as waste. This further limits the availability of storage facilities and hinders the CCS movement. . Incentives for CCS When looking at these problems it would appear that CCS does not have a future, but this is not necessarily true. CCS also has some advantages and is an essential part of reaching the 2050 low-carbon economy goal. Some examples of CCS incentives are: – a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Modelling undertaken by the International Energy Agency (IEA) forecasts that CCS could contribute to a reduction of 19% of total global greenhouse gas emission reductions by 2050. This includes reductions from coal and natural gas-fired power plants, as well as all other sources. The overall goal is a reduction of 50% of global greenhouse gas emissions compared to the 1990 levels; – the oil and gas industry will get more oil and gas by injecting carbon dioxide. This is achieved by the technique of enhanced oil/gas recovery. For example, carbon dioxide is injected and this leads to an extraction of 30 to 60% or more of the reservoir’s original oil can be extracted, compared with 20 to 40% using primary and secondary recovery. (In the primary recovery phase natural pressure within the oil drives the oil towards the production wells and, with the help of pumps or other mechanisms, to the surface. In the secondary recovery phase water is injected into an oil reservoir to increase the pressure and again drive the oil towards the production wells.); – the creation of many more jobs, which is a very desirable development in times of a high EU unemployment rate. For example, the Carbon Capture and Storage Association (CCSA) states that CCS could create 100,000 jobs across the United Kingdom by 2030. This would contribute to £6.5 billion to the economy of the United Kingdom. Future of CCS? When looking at the problems and incentives of CCS it is difficult to say whether CCS has a future. Despite the financial problems, another major problem is that CCS is not yet socially accepted. Within the European Union, people do not yet fully understand why carbon dioxide should be stored under the ground and they want to see proof that health will not be negatively affected. The European Union public believes that carbon dioxide emissions have negative health effects, but this is something that will always be there to a certain amount. This is the complete opposite of Norway, where the public also finds that carbon dioxide emissions have negative health effects, but carbon dioxide emissions should be completely avoided. More specifically, in 2000, the Norwegian government resigned over the proposed construction of two gas power plants, which would lead to an increase of carbon dioxide emissions. Therefore, applying CCS is seen as a very positive development as carbon dioxide emissions are reduced and as mentioned above the good thing is more oil and gas is retrieved. However, it should be noted that storage of carbon dioxide is within the EU a major issue as the EU does not have as much storage place under the sea as Norway. Therefore, storage under land will be a necessity. In conclusion, the European Commission, together with the governments of the 28 Member States and CCS scientists should cooperate to bring the same message across, namely CCS is a bridging technology that is necessary to obtain a low-carbon economy by 2050. (See also statement of the European Commission in the Consultative Communication on The Future of Carbon Capture and Storage in Europe, COM (2013), 180 final of 27 March 2013, page 22: “CCS is at present one of the key available technologies that can help to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the power generation sector”.) In addition, having more projects in place which show that CCS works, and is not dangerous (living on a natural gas well is more dangerous) and brings people something (such as jobs), then CCS has a bright future. M.J. Huijbers LLM is EHS Consultant for NL and partially EU for Enhesa. Continue reading
