Select Committee on Environmental Audit Written Evidence


Memorandum submitted by Ceres Power Ltd

INTRODUCTION TO CERES POWER

  Ceres Power is an AIM listed company developing global mass market alternative energy products using its unique fuel cell technology. The Company is based in Crawley, near Gatwick Airport.

  Fuel cells are solid state electrochemical devices that quietly and efficiently convert chemical energy from fuel directly into electricity and heat. Ceres is developing products for a range of applications, including a residential combined heat and power (`microCHP') system designed to supply electricity and all of the central heating and hot water for the home, from a single integrated wall-mountable unit. The unit is suitable for both replacement and new build markets, and offers the potential to substantially reduce both the home's carbon footprint and its energy costs. In January 2008, Ceres announced a significant commercial relationship with Centrica (the owner of British Gas, the largest utility in the UK) to bring this product to market in the UK mainland.

  Further information is available at www.cerespower.com

SUMMARY OF RESPONSE

    —  The Government's 2010-13 targets appear to be achievable, primarily via advanced insulation methods to reduce the thermal load of the home, together with use of efficient electrical appliances (ie. SEDBUK A rating) and a modest level of renewable energy (eg solar thermal).

    —  However, compliance with the intended 2016 "zero carbon home" appears to need substantial renewable energy (eg solar PV, biomass heating), with associated problems of capital cost, fuel logistics and site applicability. These problems are likely to severely limit mass market use.

    —  There are cost effective solutions to reduce carbon emissions in new build, which would be precluded by current low/zero carbon (LZC) definitions. We suggest that regulations be made flexible enough to allow diverse solutions achieving overall emissions reduction objectives, rather than tightly cast and effectively prescribing a small number of expensive renewable technologies.

    —  The definition of a "zero carbon home" should be "net zero carbon" ie it should be possible to:

    —  install low carbon heat / hot water technology which reduces the carbon emitted to supply the heat requirement for the building;

    —  use on-site micro-generation technology, to displace centrally generated power which has a high embedded carbon profile; and

    —  offset any remaining carbon emissions via renewable generation, which can be on-site or directly connected as per the Code for Sustainable Homes, since the actual amount of carbon offset required is likely to be small.

    —  In addition, measures to assess effectiveness (eg SAP) should be revised to correctly account for the impact of emerging solutions (eg micro-CHP) for net zero carbon new build.

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS

Reducing carbon emissions from new homes

1.   Is the target for all new homes to be zero-carbon by 2016 on track to be achieved?

    —  The Government's 2010-13 targets appear to be achievable, primarily via advanced insulation methods to reduce the thermal load of the home, together with use of efficient electrical appliances (ie. SEDBUK A rating) and a modest level of renewable energy (eg solar thermal).

    —  2016 "zero carbon home" compliance currently appears to be achievable using renewable sources (eg solar PV to provide power for lighting and appliances, biomass for renewable heating). There are problems associated with this approach:

    —  The high capital cost of solar PV, making zero carbon very expensive to implement, in conflict with mass market deployment.

    —  The availability of sufficient quantities of biomass, and the embedded carbon and logistics of transporting it to site.

2.   Does the Government need to do any more to deliver this target?

    —  Government needs to focus on the high level objective of emissions reduction, and avoid drafting regulations that effectively prescribe expensive and hard to implement solutions.

    —  There are cost effective solutions to reduce carbon emissions in new build, which would be precluded by current definitions of the "zero carbon home". This includes micro-CHP powered by conventional fuels such as natural gas or LPG.

    —  Government should examine these definitions, together with measures to assess their effectiveness (ie SAP) in order to have a wider array of solutions suitable for mass market new build deployment.

3.   How should "zero-carbon" be defined? What role should carbon offsets play in meeting this target?

    —  The definition should be `net zero carbon' ie it should be possible to:

    —  install low carbon heat / hot water technology which reduces the carbon emitted to supply the heat requirement for the building;

    —  use on-site micro-generation technology, to displace centrally generated power which has a high embedded carbon profile; and

    —  offset any remaining carbon emissions via renewable generation, which can be on-site or directly connected as per the Code for Sustainable Homes, since the actual amount of carbon offset required is likely to be small.

4.   What impact will the progressive tightening of energy efficiency building regulations have up to 2016? Are the targets for 2010 and 2013 achievable?

    —  Targets for 2010-13 look achievable mainly by using cost effective building techniques, primarily addressing the thermal load of the building.

    —  Having a "staircase" to progressively tighten energy efficiency in new build appears sensible, to encourage early emergence of solutions and provide a thermally efficient construction approach, on which power efficiency measures can then build.

5.   How should compliance with the targets be measured and enforced?

    —  Compliance at present is largely demonstrated at design stage through SAP2005 calculations. There are problems associated with SAP2005:

    —  it does not accurately reflect the electricity footprint of the home (ie only power for lighting and heating is included); and

    —  it does not accurately reflect the impact of micro-CHP technology on the home (ie it assumes a heat-driven technology such as stirling engine or organic rankin cycle, rather than fuel cell technology which has a much lower heat-to-power ratio).

    —  The performance of LZC products needs to be accurately assessed via an agreed test protocol (eg PAS67). This protocol needs to be constructed properly to take into account the differences between micro-generation technologies.

6.   What is the likely scale of environmental impacts (especially carbon emissions) of the construction of three million new homes (ie, irrespective of where they are sited)? How should these impacts be reported? What should be the role of central Government in minimising them?

    —  An average UK as-built home emits 5-6 tonnes CO2 per annum.

    —  Based on 5.6 million UK homes having natural gas micro-CHP systems installed by 2020, the CO2 saved would be equivalent to the emissions from eight (750 MW) new Combined Cycle Gas Turbine power stations (Centrica estimate).

    —  Building regulations play a key role in ensuring that the newly-built element of the building fleet minimizes its emissions.

Code for Sustainable Homes

7.   What impact is the Code for Sustainable Homes likely to have on the construction and purchase of new homes? How well is the mandatory rating likely to be enforced? Should the Code be changed in any way?

    —  The Code for Sustainable Homes needs to reflect LZC technologies via a `net zero carbon' methodology, as described above.

Greenfield and green belt developments

8.   To what extent do, and should, planning controls protect greenfield and green belt land from development of new housing? How adequately are environmental considerations (for instance, biodiversity and rural landscapes) being taken into account in deciding the location of new developments?

    —  No comment.

Infrastructure

9.   What progress has the Government made, in the two years since EAC's last report on this issue, in ensuring that new developments are being built with adequate infrastructure in order to make them successful and sustainable?

    —  Widespread residential CHP would reduce the strain on the grid, providing better overall load balancing and reducing the overall need for infrastructure investment. Recent Ofgem reports support these findings.

25 April 2008





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Prepared 3 November 2008