Memorandum by J H R Hampson
1. INTRODUCTION
There are compelling reasons for saving energy
in buildings, transport and industry. When we achieve these energy
savings there are always huge economic gains and reduced carbon
emissions. Conversely when we provide incentives for renewable
energy, whilst there are some minimal carbon savings, the cost
of electricity is increased forcing great financial burdens on
society and industry.
The dreams of harnessing our natural resources
cannot be fulfilled without great cost penalty to the electricity
consumer. Nor can substantial reductions in man-made carbon emissions
actually be achieved with Renewables. As a Consulting Engineer
it was against the grain for me to oppose technological development
on alternate energy but I always felt that every aspect of this
romantic and political initiative must be tempered with realism.
After retirement I was asked to help save a beautiful landscape
from wind turbines. I expanded by research and exposed the Great
Renewables Myth of renewable when I quantified the lack of carbon
saving benefits.
There is a total misconception with regard to
Renewable Energy in the UK. I wish to correct this. To do this
I assume that there could be 15% Renewables and show what that
really means in terms of carbon reduction. Since alternate energy
sources are not always available we have to apply load factors
to their installed capacity. I will demonstrate the impact of
Renewables on the World's man-made emissions, the impact on UK's
man-made emissions and the impact on the world's total carbon
emissions. I have used DTI published load factors. My estimates
need to be adjusted downwards for carbon emitting back-up when
the alternate energy source is not available, for example when
the wind speeds are either too low or too high. Counter arguments
state that there is already sufficient back-up available but at
one point in time all additional non reliable forms of
renewable energy will require additional back-up by carbon
emitting plant. Renewables have been unfairly supported for far
too long and have diverted attention away from the areas where
real carbon savings could be achieved. Not only are the savings
exaggerated but Renewables already impose cost penalties on electricity
consumers. Alternatives, such as reducing energy consumption in
transport and buildings and increasing the efficiency of our power
stations, save consumer cost as well as reducing carbon. Renewables
on the other hand add considerable costs and saves little carbon.
This fact needs to be published and understood by the whole population
of the United Kingdom.
I have prepared a similar paper with respect
to Scotland where they are out of touch with reality in terms
of Renewables and consumer costs. This is especially the case
with their recent proposed rejection of DTI/BERR information on
wave and tidal energy. BERR claim that these are not worthy of
special support at this time and I endorse that view. In Scotland
the situation is different since there is hydro capacity and they
do not support nuclear. Sadly they have been unable to develop
support for the preservation of the countryside from the expansion
of wind farms as distinct from what has been achieved in the Lake
District. The key issue is that Scotland is a net supporter of
electricity and their 50% proposed Renewables target means expensive
transmission either sub-sea, under-ground or by the use of ugly
high pylons. The visual intrusion will be on both sides of the
border unless more expensive options of undergrounding or sub-sea
are accounted for.
I have not focussed on the actual costs since
I know that others are better equipped to provide this information.
I have concentrated on the lack of benefits from Renewables. Suffice
to state that we are dealing with between 3.5 and 12 times the
cost of conventional power which the consumer pays for, even although
this whole exercise does little for the reduction of the world's
carbon reductions.
2. QUANTIFICATION
OF RENEWABLES
CONTRIBUTION
2.1 Effect of 15% Renewables in UK on the
World's man-made emissions:
FIGURES FOR UK BASED ON MAN-MADE CO2 EMISSIONS
| UK Carbon Contribution |
2.2% of World Contribution |
| ElectricityGeneration | 35% of Man-Made
|
| | |
| Wind Power | 11% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Wind | 35% |
| Wind Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 3.85%
|
| Wind Carbon Saving | 0.02965% Man-made Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Wave Power | 1% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Wave | 25% |
| Wave Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 0.25%
|
| Wave Carbon Saving | 0.00193% Man-made Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Tidal Power | 1% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Tidal | 27% |
| Tidal Corrected for Load Factor | 0.27%
|
| Tidal Carbon Saving | 0.00208% Man-made Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Hydro Power | 2% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Hydro | 35% |
| Hydro Corrected for Load Factor | 0.7%
|
| Hydro Carbon Saving | 0.00539% Total Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Total Carbon Saving for 15% Renewables |
0.039% Total Carbon Emissions |
We can conclude from this that 15% UK Renewables would represent
a reduction in the world's man-made emissions by 1 part in 2,561.
2.2 UK Renewables influence on UK's man-made emissions:
|
| Electricity Generation man-made emissions
| 35% of UK's man-made emissions
|
| 15% Renewables contribution to reducing carbon emissions from Electricity Generation
|
|
| Wind Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 3.85%
|
| Wave Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 0.25%
|
| Tidal Corrected for Load Factor | 0.27%
|
| Hydro Corrected for Load Factor | 0.7%
|
| Total Reduction of Electricity Generation emissions
| 5.07% of Electricity Generation
|
| 15% Renewables contribution to UK's man-made
| 1.7745% of UK's Carbon Emissions
|
|
From the foregoing we can conclude that 15% Renewables would
reduce UK's man-made carbon emissions by only 1.8% or 1 part in
56.
2.3 Influence of 15% UK Renewables on the World's total
carbon emissions:
FIGURES FOR UK BASED ON TOTAL CO2 EMISSIONS
| Man-made CO2 | 3.2% of Total CO2
|
| UK Carbon Contribution | 2.2% of World Contribution
|
| Electricity Generation | 35% of Man-Made
|
| | |
| Wind Power | 11% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Wind | 27% |
| Wind Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 2.97%
|
| Wind Carbon Saving | 0.00073% Total Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Wave Power | 1% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Wave | 25% |
| Wave Energy Corrected for Load Factor | 0.25%
|
| Wave Carbon Saving | 0.00006% Total Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Tidal Power | 1% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Tidal | 27% |
| Tidal Corrected for Load Factor | 0.27%
|
| Tidal Carbon Saving | 0.00007% Total Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Hydro Power | 2% of Installed Capacity of Generation
|
| Load Factor of Hydro | 35% |
| Hydro Corrected for Load Factor | 0.7%
|
| Hydro Carbon Saving | 0.00017% Total Carbon Emissions
|
| | |
| Total Carbon Saving for 15% Renewables |
0.00103% Total Carbon Emissions |
We conclude from the foregoing that 15% UK Renewables would
represent a mere reduction of 0.001% or 1 part in 96,860 of the
world's total emissions.
From this it is easy to see that UK Renewables not only make
an insignificant contribution to World emissions but even at a
level of 15% they actually contribute only a 1.8% saving in UK's
man-made CO2 emissions.
It is my understanding that Renewables is a devolved responsibility
so that regardless Scotland is likely to opt for 50% renewable.
This would have the effect of increasing the foregoing figures
by just under 4% since Scotland's electricity share is around
11% of the UK generation.
3. COSTS
I now turn to the cost burdens of Renewables. Now that the
days of nationalisation are over, all costs are borne by the consumers.
Electricity prices have risen by a third this year and that probably
means that 1 million UK households will be consigned to fuel poverty.
Industry and commerce are responsibly addressing those carbon
reductions which matter. At this time they too are also carrying
the burden of Renewables in their electricity costs. These costs
will continue to rise unless the policy is changed. It is outrageous
that ineffective and expensive Renewables should be financed at
the same time as such other initiatives by responsible consumers.
Both the UK and Scottish governments are being fanciful about
the leffect of Renewables and ignore their high cost to the consumer.
These high costs are concealed because they do not need to be
accounted for as government expenditure.
Affordability is a strong feature in the UK Energy Policy
and with the benefit of this Inquiry we should at last see that
in the UK the CO2 change through Renewables can only be a token
gesture and we indulge in this at great inconvenience and cost
with negligible influence on world emissions. Carbon is only one
of the emissions which could influence climate change and it is
naive to continue to focus solely on carbon and electricity generation.
All forms of renewable energy cost considerably more than
electricity generated by conventional means. The penalties to
consumers have to be properly assessed.
The people of Scotland have made it clear through their extensive
objections to the Beauly-Denny tall pylon infrastructure that
they do not want to see Scotland's landscape decimated in this
manner.
The Public Inquiry process for the Beauly-Denny line has
not yet been concluded. The people's reactions to pylons and turbines
are similar in England. The transmission costs through the borders
to England have not yet been demonstrated. These energy forms
are already prohibitively expensive even without transmission
costs being taken into account. They will require new infrastructure
and whether this involves high pylons or is put underground or
sub-sea it has to be fully accounted for.
BERR recognises that the wave and tidal energy forms are
not ready for support at this time. The issue of non-viability
is not something which can be tackled overnight. These energy
forms have been on the academics' and engineers' wish lists for
decades. The sites where energy from these sources are consistently
strong are remote from consumers. The situation in Scotland is
different from the rest of the UK. They intend to promote wave
and tidal by changing the banding.
Whilst in overall terms inflation seems to be under control,
food and energy are inflating beyond all expectations but not
beyond reason. We are already paying the penalty for delaying
decisions on UK energy policy, as well as the cost penalties of
the initiatives of both Westminster and Holyrood to encourage
non-viable wind energy which is several times the cost of conventional
energy.
4. THE LIMITS
OF RENEWABLES
As demonstrated above the carbon argument for Renewables
is weak. Furthermore whenever the carbon emitting reserve has
to be increased to back-up additional Renewables the carbon
argument completely disappears and incentives must be stopped.
Without these incentives it will no longer be a great money spinner
and the development of wind energy will then grind to an immediate
halt.
Affordable electricity costs are essential for our economy
and well being. Non viable forms of electricity generation should
not be encouraged.
The UK grid and the transmission infrastructure are designed
for power stations feeding out to remote and diverse users. Where
renewable energy sources are plentiful they are far removed from
the points of demand and new infrastructure is needed.
Wind energy has to be limited to ensure grid stability and
also in order to avoid grid failures similar to those recently
experienced in Europe and USA.
5. THE CAUSES
OF CLIMATE
CHANGE ARE
STILL UNDER
SCRUTINY
We must recognise that the assumption is now being challenged
that man-made carbon emissions are a key influencing factor in
Climate Change. The scientific and engineering communities remain
divided as to whether or not man-made emissions are key influencers
of global warming. To date no study has proved this to be the
case. The major proponent of this premise is the IPPC but even
they acknowledge that major climate change preceded man-made emissions.
Their recent summary document states that, "Paleoclimate
information supports the interpretation that the warmth of the
last half century is unusual in at least the previous 1,300 years.
The last time the Polar Regions were significantly warmer than
present for an extended period (about 125,000 years ago), reductions
in polar ice volume led to 4 to 6 metres of sea level rise ..."
There were no man-made emissions in the former situation
and there is plenty of evidence to show the cycles of warming
and cooling before then and between then and now. This is strong
evidence from the very body which the government relies on to
back up their case on carbon emissions. It is beyond question
that Global warming and cooling are natural phenomena. Suffice
to state that there is an opposing view on whether man-made emissions
have a meaningful influence. We will have wasted a lot of consumer
monies on addressing this subject before it is ultimately proved
that the influence is not significant, Those who promote Renewables
on the basis of major carbon impact are presenting a misleading
cure since 65% of the UK's man-made emissions CO2 do not emanate
from electricity generation and Renewables only contribute to
electricity generation. However even if the government concentrated
on the higher 65% in the form of transport, heating and industry
because of its size the UK is unable to meaningfully influence
world carbon levels and climate change This subject needs to be
fully understood by all politicians not just a few.
6. SUMMARY
— The ability of the UK to influence world emissions
is near zero, even if we hypothetically considered the production
of all our electricity by non carbon emitting means. The larger
portion of UK's man-made emissions is from transportation, heating
and industry.
— Consumers cannot afford the additional costs of
Renewables which in any case only relate to a small percentage
of the 35% of man-made carbon emissions which in turn relates
only to electricity generation.
— Until the issues of affordability can be properly
addressed there is no justification for pursuing high cost non-viable
forms of renewable energy.
— Wind energy is decimating our beautiful countryside.
— Wind energy will always be considerably more expensive
than conventional energy and the carbon argument is not an acceptable
card to play where the effect on world emissions is negligible.
— Vested commercial interests and efficient lobbying
of Westminster coupled with deals done in Brussels by many who
are ill informed are the root cause of this burden on British
society. Ministers have not considered the severe cost implications
on electricity consumers of the necessary additional transmission
together with its visual intrusion on our landscapes or further
increased costs in its concealment have not been properly investigated.
— Biomass releases carbon on combustion and the
incentives offered will lead to farmers moving away from food
production.
I hope that this inquiry will lead to an independent quantification
of the limited benefits of Renewables and the burdens placed on
electricity consumers by these,together with the decimation of
our countryside and shorelines by wind turbines.
3 June 2008
| 
