Tag Archives: published
Nigel Adams: We Can Lead Europe In Renewable Power Struggle
The Biomass Dome at Drax Power Station Published on the 15 July 2013 I am proud to have two of the country’s largest power stations in my constituency. Between them, Drax and Eggborough produce as much as 11 per cent of the UK’s electricity as well as being significant employers. Traditionally each of these power stations is coal-fired, although both have been “co-firing” biomass with coal for a number of years. Biomass is generally pelletised wood thinnings and offcuts, although it can also come in the form of energy crops like miscanthus, or agricultural by-products like straw. Co-firing biomass has resulted in significant carbon reductions over the years, and has also meant that Drax and Eggborough have both become significant generators of renewable energy. As a result of improved Government support which will allow the UK to benefit fully from biomass as an energy source, Drax and Eggborough have recently begun transitioning away from coal, in order to use more biomass in the years ahead. However, coal still has a very important part to play in the energy mix – particularly as carbon capture and storage is being developed, and again, thanks to this Government’s support, Drax is a key player in moving this important project forward. The shift to biomass is good news for Britain. As a result of various EU rules, taxes and other factors, the UK is going to lose around 12 gigawatts of its generating capacity by 2016 – in layman’s terms that’s enough electricity to power nearly 20 million homes. This generation gap will ultimately be filled by new gas, nuclear and other renewables – but it needs to be bridged in the meantime. Biomass has a key role to play in bridging that gap and keeping the lights on in Britain. Biomass is also great news for my Selby and Ainsty constituency, and for Yorkshire as a whole. It means that two key power stations have a more secure future and thousands of jobs have been safeguarded, as well as lots of new jobs being created. . The use of biomass for power has also resulted in significant investment in the UK’s ports and railways, again creating more new jobs. Significant investment is leading to massive upgrades at a number of ports including the Port of Hull, and the Port of Grimsby and Immingham. Similarly, rail is the only viable way to transport biomass in the UK and significant investment is already being made in the UK’s railways to reflect this. Despite all the positives, some are opposed to using biomass for power. Some environmental groups believe that burning biomass for power will produce higher CO2 emissions than coal. Others have pointed out that much of the UK’s biomass will be imported from America, and have used this as a basis for suggesting the biomass cannot be sustainable, and that its use promotes energy insecurity. These critics are simply wrong. I know that Drax rigorously measures the carbon footprint of the biomass it uses over its full life cycle from forest to furnace. This means that emissions from harvesting, processing and transportation right to the point of burning biomass pellets to generate electricity are taken into account. Alongside this clinical carbon accounting, they have also pioneered sustainability criteria and advocates mandatory criteria for the entire biomass industry. This ensures that the biomass used at Drax and Eggborough is sustainable. As a result, contrary to what its opponents say, last year, the average emissions saving over the full life cycle of burning sustainable biomass instead of coal was above 80 per cent. To those who suggest that importing biomass promotes energy insecurity, I would merely remind them that currently, all of the coal used by Eggborough, and around half the coal used by Drax is already imported from overseas. We should be honest: biomass is not a non carbon renewable; it’s a low carbon renewable. But whether its opponents like it or not, biomass is going to play a key role as part of Britain’s energy mix in the years ahead. Converting existing power stations to burn biomass is an extremely cost effective way to generate renewable power. Not only that, it allows for reliable, predictable and dispatchable generation, and has considerable advantages over less reliable technologies, like onshore windfarms, by virtue of it not being entirely dependent on the vagaries of the British weather. In short, biomass is going to be extremely important in keeping the lights on in Britain over the next few years and it will be a significant player in retaining and creating thousands of skilled jobs. Once Drax has converted three of its six generating units, its carbon footprint will be halved on today’s levels. Additionally, the UK’s largest single emitter of carbon will become one of the world’s largest renewable electricity generators and when Eggborough converts, I’ll be proud to say that my constituency in Yorkshire will become Europe’s leader in generating electricity from renewable sources. Continue reading
MEPs To Vote On Biofuels As Study Points To Hunger, Deforestation
Published 10 July 2013 As MEPs prepare to vote on a proposal to curb EU support for biofuels, new research has found that growing fuel crops in place of food automatically creates either hunger or deforestation. According to new research by Tim Searchinger , a Princeton University research scholar and acknowledged biofuels expert, a tragic equation is buried in existing modelling data used by the EU to establish the effects of indirect land use change (ILUC) – the increased CO 2 emissions that displaced agricultural activity may create. When agricultural land that had been used to grow food is given over to growing biofuels, someone somewhere will go hungry – unless previously uncultivated land is taken to grow the displaced food, or yields from existing crops increase commensurately. But “there is extremely little evidence that you will get additional yield gains,” Searchinger said over the phone from New Jersey yesterday (9 July), “and without that you get two bad responses: You have some land expansion, and people eat less.” Searchinger’s reading of one key report produced for the EU by the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) found that of every 100 calories from wheat or maize diverted to food tanks by bioethanol production, 25 calories were not replaced. “If you step back, take the broader view and see that people are going to have to produce 60% more food by 2050 [to feed a growing world population] that we’re not going to be able to feed entirely from yield gain, biofuels will just compound that problem.” European Parliament vote The new analysis, which was number-crunched with the help of the EU’s Joint Research Centre, is being released by Friends of the Earth as the European Parliament’s environment committee prepares to vote on a proposal to curb EU support for biofuels. Friends of the Earth’s biofuels campaigner Robbie Blake called it a “game-changer” Corrine LePage MEP, who is presenting the report to the committee, wants to augment a proposed 5% cap on ‘first generation’ biofuels’ (link) share of the 2020 transport mix with ILUC factors written into statute that distinguish between the best and worst-performing biofuels, for greenhouse gas emissions. Several amendments have been added to the text though, one of which would raise the cap to 6.5%, and the outcome of the vote is thought too close to call. After the vote, it will go to a plenary session on 10 September, before final negotiations with member states begin. LePage sent EurActiv a written reponse to Searchinger’s research, saying: “If these results are validated, they would confirm that the EU demand for biofuels can have very detrimental impacts not only on the environment, but also on people.” She added: “I hope this will convince MEPs who are still hesitant to support at least the 5% cap and the inclusion of ILUC factors and to support the proposed compromises on the table, rather than merely take into account the economic interests at stake.” “If MEPs vote on Thursday to increase levels of biofuels, they will be casting a vote for hunger, and mandating that some of the world’s poorest people eat less food,” Blake added. “That is totally unacceptable.” Industry aggrieved However, reactions from the bioethanol industry in Brussels were fierce, personal and uncompromising. Although Searchinger is a respected economist, affectionately known as ‘the godfather of ILUC’ by environmentalists, his academic work has raised hackles. “I wouldn’t expect anything good to come out of Searchinger,” said Rob Vierhout, the secretary-general of ePure, the European Renewable Ethanol Association told EurActiv. “Whatever he says, he is biased. He is not even a scientist. He is a lawyer and could defend any position you want him to.” Before coming to Princeton, Searchinger was an attorney for the Environmental Defence Fund, where he wrote a prize-winning book on wetlands and led work to protect the Everglades and Mississippi river. “My concern is that he is illiterate in social sciences and wouldn’t get through first year social sciences grade,” added Eric Sievers, the CEO of Ethanol Europe Renewables Limited. “His work is sensationalist and works against responsible policymaking by perpetuating misinformation.” But Princeton University says that Searchinger’s works on ILUC “generally have been credited with reshaping the world debate on bioenergy.” Professor Detlef Sprinz, the former chairman of the European Environment Agency, told EurActiv that Searchinger’s work was “rather important” and “published in some of the best journals that we have.” Damaging implications But the implications of his work are highly damaging to the bioethanol industry’s case. For instance, the IFPRI study – which the industry criticises – also predicts a large reduction in food quality due to fuel crops, and that 60% of every hectare of maize planted for ethanol will come at the expense of using that land to grow food crops. Vierhout stoutly rejected such claims. “We don’t use that much maize for making ethanol,” he told EurActiv. “Most of what we use is [animal] feed wheat – not food wheat – and, sugar beet that was also never intended for food purposes, so I don’t see how you could say it is jeapordising food availability.” He added: “We don’t import wheat or maize for that purpose. We only use European crops and we always have too much land laying idle.” Searchinger though said that land used to produce animal feed for biofuels would require more land to be used elsewhere to produce feed for animals. This displacement effect was already accounted for in the studies, he argued. “The industry is trying to give the impression that there is this surplus land out there and there just isn’t,” he said. World increases in grain yields, which have tripled since 1950, are thought to be approaching a plateau, with only 1.3% annual growth in global grain yields since 1950, according to US scientists . NEXT STEPS: 1 July 2014: New biofuels installations must meet a 60% greenhouse gas saving threshold 1 Dec. 2017: Biofuels installations in operation before 1 July 2014 must meet a greenhouse gas saving threshold of 35% 31 Dec. 2017: The Commission will submit a review of policy and best scientific evidence on ILUC to the European Parliament and Council 1 Jan. 2018: Biofuels installations in operation before 1 July 2014 must meet a greenhouse gas saviong threshold of 50% 1 Jan. 2020: Deadline for 10% of EU’s transport fuels to be sourced from renewable energies. 2020 : European Commission will not support further subsidies to biofuels unless they can demonstrate “substantial greenhouse gas savings” Arthur Neslen Continue reading
Biofuel Plant Will Be Boon For Arable And Livestock Sectors
By Andrew Arbuckle Published on 09/07/2013 00:00 The official opening of the massive bioethanol Vivergo refinery on Humberside yesterday was welcomed by the English NFU not only for its planned annual consumption of more than one million tonnes of wheat but also for providing half a million tonnes of animal feed. The Vivergo company was set up six years ago by AB Sugar, the petroleum company BP and the chemical giant Du Pont. Since then some £350 million has been spent on creating the plant on the 25 acre site which will, at full production, produce some 420 million litres of bioethanol annually. The union said the refinery would not only provide an alternative to fossil fuels through its production of bioethanol but would also reduce the UK’s reliance on imports of soya from the Americas. A spokesman said the opening of the facility would come as a relief to both the arable and livestock sectors following a difficult 12 months, which saw a below average harvest, the temporary mothballing of an ethanol plant by Ensus and high animal feed prices as a result of the poor weather across the country. NFU combinable crops board member Brett Askew said: “It’s a boost to farmers to hear that Vivergo will be maximising their potential capacity in the run up to harvest. “The industry’s troubles have been well documented over the past year and the latest noises emerging from Brussels on common agricultural policy reform have done little to lighten the mood. “Multiple markets for our produce allows individual farmers the certainty we need to do what we do best and produce to satisfy market demand for food, feed and fuel. We have a responsibility to help drive a sustainable increase in production and the biofuels market can play a role in delivering the necessary economic certainty that will help us all achieve this.” But he added that policy makers had to take a really close look at the enormous benefits collaboration between the agricultural industry and biofuels sector could deliver. He hoped they would then provide the consistency in policy making that would allow farmers to not only sustainably feed the country but also to contribute towards a changing energy sector. ANDREW ARBUCKLE Continue reading
