All about energy

The decision comes after months of talks and is believed to have been finalised as a result of an important change in the budget last week, which brought public grants of upwards of £60m for ports to build green manufacturing hubs around them.

“With the new wind turbine production plant in the UK we’re pushing ahead with our strategy of investments in attractive growth markets for eco-friendly technology. In the foreseeable future the wind power market in the UK will be characterised by major offshore projects, and we’ll extend our market leadership with the new production plant,” said Peter Löscher, President and CEO of Siemens AG.

Andreas J. Goss, Siemens’ chief executive in the UK, said: “The UK government has created a stable framework to attract inward investment in renewables and offshore wind power in particular. The competition for land development, announced in the Budget last week, gives us confidence that the appropriate UK port infrastructure can be made available to support our production plans.”

The Siemens facility is expected to create 700 direct jobs and perhaps as many as 1,500 more in the supply chain. The plans come only a few days after GE announced a similar initiative in Britain, with investment of £100m, creating 2,000 jobs. Mitsubishi of Japan and Clipper Windpower have also announced schemes to make bigger and better blades that could bring down the cost of producing wind offshore.

Siemens is currently exploring a number of sites on the East Coast and in the North East and will make its decision about the exact location when the competition process for land development is complete. The company is working closely with the Regional Development Agencies and its partners to find the optimum site.

Big utilities such as E.ON and RWE have already won acreage under the Round Three (R3) licensing scheme to develop wind farms many miles off the coast of Britain. But some have warned that the economics remain fragile, given the deep water levels and other factors involved, unless development costs can be driven down.

Commenting on the announcement from Siemens Frost & Sullivan’s Wind Energy Industry Analyst Gouri Kumar said, “A combination of factors such as the UK government’s efforts to attract these companies to set up plants in the UK, the support to the offshore wind industry in the recent UK budget as well as the announcement of Round Three offshore wind project leasing, has sent the right signals to the market about how serious the UK is about developing the offshore wind market.

“The string of announcements from Clipper Windpower a few months ago to Siemens today is conveying to the market that the UK is finally converting rhetoric to some action and is one step ahead in creating a much-needed supply chain in the UK. There is no doubt that the UK is going to be the centre of offshore wind development and therefore needs to bring jobs and investment to the country in order to support that development. The commitment to the sector from the government and industry participants need to continue.”

A century of whaling may have released more than 100 million tonnes – or a large forest’s worth – of carbon into the atmosphere, scientists say.

Whales store carbon within their huge bodies and when they are killed, much of this carbon can be released.

US scientists revealed their estimate of carbon released by whaling at the Ocean Sciences meeting in Portland, US.

Dr Andrew Pershing from the University of Maine described whales as the “forests of the ocean”.

Dr Pershing and his colleagues from the Gulf of Maine Research Institute calculated the annual carbon-storing capacity of whales as they grew.

“Whales, like any animal or plant on the planet, are made out of a lot of carbon,” he said.

“And when you kill and remove a whale from the ocean, that’s removing carbon from this storage system and possibly sending it into the atmosphere.”

He pointed out that, particularly in the early days of whaling, the animals were a source of lamp oil, which was burned, releasing the carbon directly into the air.

“And this marine system is unique because when whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean.

“If they die where it’s deep enough, it will be [stored] out of the atmosphere perhaps for hundreds of years.”

Ocean trees

In their initial calculations, the team worked out that 100 years of whaling had released an amount of carbon equivalent to burning 130,000 sq km of temperate forests, or to driving 128,000 Humvees continuously for 100 years.

Dr Pershing stressed that this was still a relatively tiny amount when compared to the billions of tonnes produced by human activity every year.

When whales die [naturally], their bodies sink, so they take that carbon down to the bottom of the ocean. Dr Andrew Pershing, University of Maine

But he said that whales played an important role in storing and transporting carbon in the marine ecosystem.

Simply leaving large groups of whales to grow, he said, could “sequester” the greenhouse gas, in amounts that were comparable to some of the reforestation schemes that earn and sell carbon credits.

He suggested that a similar system of carbon credits could be applied to whales in order to protect and rebuild their stocks.

“The idea would be to do a full accounting of how much carbon you could store in a fully populated stock of fish or whales, and allow countries to sell their fish quota as carbon credits,” he explained.

“You could use those credits as an incentive to reduce the fishing pressure or to promote the conservation of some of these species.”

Other scientists said that he had raised an exciting and interesting problem.

Professor Daniel Costa, a marine animal researcher from the University of California, Santa Cruz, told BBC News: “So many more groups are looking at the importance of these large animals in the carbon cycle.

“And it’s one of those things that, when you look at it, you think: ‘ This is so obvious, why didn’t we think of this before?’.”

Is bigger better?

Dr Pershing pointed out that whales, with their huge size, were more efficient than smaller animals at storing carbon.

He used the analogy of a small dog compared to a large dog.

“My wife’s 6lb (2.7kg) toy poodle eats one cup of food per day and my dog – a 60lb standard poodle – eats five cups of food per day,” he said.

“That’s only five times as much food but my dog weighs ten times as much.”

He said that the marine carbon credit idea could be applied to other very large marine animals, including endangered bluefin tuna and white sharks.

Dr Pershing said: “These are huge and they are top predators, so unless they’re fished they would be likely to take their biomass to the bottom of the ocean [when they die].”

The study by a panel of independent experts found that the irritation caused by the noise around wind farms can effect certain individuals.

Scientists dismissed the idea of a “wind turbine syndrome” where the vibrations in the air or the particular sound waves from wind turbines cause headaches, nausea and panic attacks.

However, they did concede that the swishing sound caused by wind turbines can “annoy” some people, keeping them awake at night and even causing psychological problems because of the stress.

The Government is planning on building thousands more wind turbines onshore and the report has led calls for more research into the noise effects caused by the turbines.

But the wind industry said if wind turbines were harmful, it would be impossible to live in a city given the sound levels normally present in urban environments.

The Government insisted that wind farms do not have a direct impact on health.

Wind farms have traditionally been seen by protesters as a blot on the British countryside, but it has now emerged that their noise may make people ill.

A new study found no evidence for “wind turbine syndrome” where the wind farms directly cause a host of health problems such as headaches, nausea and panic attacks.

But the swishing sound caused by wind turbines can be a problem for certain people, causing sleep deprivation and even mental health problems.

It has sparked renewed debate on the Government’s plans for more onshore wind and led to calls for more research into the problems caused by noise.

A panel of independent experts in public health, audiology and medicine looked at peer-reviewed studies on the health effects of wind turbines.

Wind Turbine Sound and Health Effects, commissioned by the American Wind Energy Association, found that some people may be “annoyed” by the sound of wind turbines. A major cause of concern is the fluctuating nature of the sound, which is particularly stressful for some people because it is difficult to get accustomed to intermittent noise.

Dr Geoff Leventhall, an honorary fellow of the UK’s Institute of Acoustics and one of the authors of the study, said noise from wind turbines can disturb people in the same way as any other noise pollution, such as an airport nearby.

“The conclusions of our report were that the main effects of wind turbines noise is similar to the effect of any other noise and will disturb people if they are listening to a noise they do not want to hear. One of the main effects is sleep disturbance which can lead to other stress related effects.”

Presenting the evidence at a Wind Turbine Noise meeting organised by the IOA in Cardiff, he emphasised that only a small number of people find the noise distressing, which can lead to sleep deprivation and psychological problems.

“The number of people who suffer these extreme effects are small and ** if the turbines are designed properly the effects are minimised even further,” he added.

Jane Davis is hoping to take the country’s first private nuisance case against a wind farm to the High Court.

The 54-year-old was forced to move from her home in Lincolnshire after eight wind turbines were built in 2006.

The qualified nurse said one in five wind farms cause noise problems for the local people.

“All I know is the amount of health problems people have suffered since [the turbines were put up] seem to be excessive in relation to what was happening,” she said. “Those symptoms include sleep deprivation, tittinus, vertigo, depression, raised blood pressure, atrial fibrillation (abnormal heart beat), needing to go the lavatory at night more often than you would normally, pneumonia, ear infections, stomach disorders and psychological stress.”

Mrs Davis said 190 campaigners around the country have complained of noise and are expected to consider legal proceedings if the test case is successful.

“This is not Nimbyism. These things have devastated my life and continue to do so,” she said. “The last four years have been hell and there has been no redress.”

The Government has plans to build up to 6,000 new turbines onshore over the next ten years.

Mary Stevens, policy officer at the charity Environment Protection UK, said there will need to be more research into the problems caused by noise.

“While we fully support the deployment of renewable energy, we believe, that like any major development, the siting and operation of wind farms must be carried out with full regard to any significant and lasting impacts on local environmental quality and health,” she said.

However the British Wind Energy Association pointed out that the new report said there were no direct health effects from wind farms.

“The findings of the study tally with UK research on the subject. In 2007 a Government-backed study carried out by the University of Salford found that only one wind farm in the UK was ever found to present a noise nuisance to residents and the issue has since been resolved,” a spokesman said.

Wind turbines by numbers

The Government wants to built up to 6,000 new wind turbines on land over the next ten years.

At the moment there are more than 2,500 turbines onshore.

The turbines are around 300ft high

Onshore wind provides around 2.5 per cent of the country’s electricity needs

The current limit for noise is 43 maximum decibels at night

Campaigners want it reduced to 33 decibels at night

Homeowners in Scotland may soon be allowed to put wind turbines on their roofs without planning permission.

Turbines with a maximum 3m height and 3.5m diameter would be permitted under the plans.

Free-standing wind turbines as tall as 11m and at least 100m from neighbouring properties would also be allowed.

The Scottish government said the proposals could help cut energy bills and reduce emissions. Labour criticised delays in the process.

Climate Change Minister Stewart Stevenson stressed that the plans were “not a vision of unrestricted development”.

The proposals, which are due to be launched next Friday, are part of an ongoing consultation on renewable energy.

I believe our proposals strike the right balance in the best interests of Scotland Stewart Stevenson Climate Change Minister

If passed, they would give “permitted development rights” to homeowners to install turbines and air-source heat pumps, except in conservation areas and World Heritage Sites.

They also include plans to allow anemometer masts, which measure wind speed, on roofs and in gardens, but only for a maximum of 12 months.

Air-source heat pumps would also be allowed in conservation areas if they were invisible from the road.

Mr Stevenson said: “By cutting red tape in the planning system we can make it easier for households to generate their own clean, green energy.”

‘Important step’

If implemented, the proposals will boost Scotland’s renewables sector, potentially generating new jobs, he said.

“We have already acted to make it possible for people to install certain technologies but recognise we could go further,” the minister added.

“That’s why, after researching the feasibility, we are now consulting on these ambitious new measures.

“This is not a vision of unrestricted development. But I believe our proposals strike the right balance in the best interests of Scotland.”

While we are glad that common sense has prevailed the fact is that Scotland is already behind other countries Sarah Boyack Labour environment spokeswoman

Mike Thornton, Scottish director of the Energy Saving Trust, said the measures could help meet climate change targets.

“Permitted development rights for these technologies are an important step in reducing the barriers for their uptake,” he added.

However, Scottish Labour environment spokeswoman Sarah Boyack said the new consultation only meant more delays.

She said: “This has been totally mishandled from the start and now we have an admission from the SNP that they have completely botched up the original plans.

“While we are glad that common sense has prevailed the fact is that Scotland is already behind other countries and another consultation will result in more delays.”

A strategy to transform Glasgow into one of Europe’s greenest cities within a decade will be published later.

The Sustainable Glasgow report will set out methods to drive down carbon emissions and meet future energy needs.

It will cover areas such as renewable energy, district heating, sustainable transport, smart grids, biogas, biomass and energy management and efficiency.

The report has been drawn up by Sustainable Glasgow, a consortium led by the University of Strathclyde.

Other partners include, Glasgow City Council, Scottish and Southern Energy, Veolia (Source One), Scottish Enterprise and Blitzer, Clancy and Company.

The project aims to transform the city into a hub of the sustainable energy sector, delivering jobs and training.

It will play a major role in attempts to regenerate communities and tackle fuel poverty.

The chairman of the UN’s climate science body said he would not resign in the wake of a row about a mistake on glaciers that appeared in a key report.

Rajendra Pachauri told BBC News: “I am not going to stand down, I am going to stand up.”

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admitted that it had made a mistake in asserting that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

Critics say the mistake has damaged the scientific credibility of the IPCC.

“I was re-elected by acclamation, essentially – I imagine – because everyone was satisfied with my performance on the fourth assessment report,” Dr Pachauri said.

“I am now charged with producing the fifth assessment report, which I will do faithfully and to the best of my abilities.”

Credibility concerns

Last week, IPCC vice-chairman Jean-Pascal van Ypersele said the panel had made a mistake in asserting that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035.

Dr Pachauri blamed “human error” for the mistake Climate body admits glacier error Himalaya glacier deadline ‘wrong’

The date appeared in the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (4AR), which read: “Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world… the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high.”

A number of scientists had recently disputed the 2035 figure, after a row erupted in India late last year in the run-up to the Copenhagen climate summit, which BBC News reported on 5 December.

Opposing factions in the Indian government gave radically different opinions of what was happening to Himalayan ice.

Dr Pachauri said the inclusion of the 2035 date in the 4AR, which was published in 2007, was “a case of human error”, adding that it was unfortunate that it had happened.

“However, let me emphasise that this does not in any way detract from the fact that the glaciers are melting, and this is a problem that we need to be deeply concerned about.”

He told BBC News that he became aware of the error “maybe around the 16th or 17th of January”.

“Then we swung into action,” he explained.

“I got the entire top team of the IPCC to go through the details of this case, and we decided that this was an error but we also saw that this did not in any way move away from the reality that these glaciers are melting.”

The claim that Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 appears to have originated in a 1999 interview with Indian glaciologist Syed Hasnain, published in New Scientist magazine.

The figure then surfaced in a 2005 report by environmental group WWF – a report that is cited in the IPCC’s 2007 assessment, known as AR4.

An alternative genesis lies in the misreading of a 1996 study by a Russian researcher that gave the date as 2350.

Gathering storm

In a separate development, a report in the UK’s Sunday Times newspaper said the IPCC faced “new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters”, in its 2007 milestone report.

However, the IPCC issued a statement that said the story was “misleading and baseless”.

It stated: “The assessment addresses both observations of past changes and projections of future changes in sectors ranging from heat waves and precipitation to wildfire.

“Each of these is a careful assessment of the available evidence, with a thorough consideration of the confidence with which each conclusion can be drawn.

“In writing, reviewing, and editing this section, IPCC procedures were carefully followed to produce the policy-relevant assessment that is the IPCC mandate.”

Some commentators maintain that these developments, taken together with the contents of e-mails stolen last year from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, it undermines the credibility of climate science.

But a defiant Dr Pachauri said: “I want to tell the sceptics… who see me as the face and the voice of the science of climate change, I am in no mood to oblige them; I am going to remain as chairman of the IPCC for my entire term.”

Average speed cameras could be fitted on all of Britain’s motorways if new proposals to slash carbon emissions are approved by the Government.

The first average speed camera on a major urban road was recently introduced

The devices lead to fewer accidents and speeding tickets on the roads where they are installed than normal speed cameras, a new report by the Government’s environmental advisers claims.

The Sustainable Development Commission is calling for cameras to be installed on all motorways in the UK because it is predicted that if all drivers stuck to 70mph, the UK’s carbon emissions would be cut by 1.4 million tonnes.

In its report the Commission says drivers slam on the brakes when they see a speed camera and accelerate away as soon as they have passed it.

But, it argues, average speed cameras, which measure speed over distance rather than one point, encourage smoother, more environmentally-friendly driving.

The call for more average speed cameras comes days after London Mayor Boris Johnson announced the devices would be introduced on the A13 in East London.

The Government is poised to approve a new generation of cameras that can trace the speed of journeys over a network of streets.

If this goes ahead the devices will be fitted on all urban residential roads with a 20mph speed limit.

The report also suggests capping all cars to make it impossible to break the speed limit and teaching motorists “eco-driving” techniques.

Car sharing clubs should also be encouraged to grow and the use of technologies such as video conferencing should be used to reduce the need to travel, the report says.

Federal regulators unveiled a proposal Thursday meant to curb speculation in energy such as crude oil but critics said it fell fall short of what was needed.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission said the measure would put limits on the number of energy futures that energy traders could buy.

Financial instruments such as commodity index funds have become popular investments for pension funds and other investors. Banks and others selling the investments offset their financial risk by buying energy futures.

The result has been a large increase in futures trading, which was blamed for some of the record rise in oil prices in 2008. The commission chairman has previously said it was a problem that needed to be reined in.

But those who had hoped that CFTC would do just that said they were disappointed by the proposal. They said few would be affected because the limits are too high and there are exemptions further curbing the proposal’s effectiveness.

“I’m underwhelmed ,” said Tyson Slocum, head of the Public Citizens energy program. “It underscores the need for Congress to do something.”

One aim is to make Brecon a net exporter of electricity

A UK scheme to generate power from mountain streams is one of three winners of a £1m prize for saving carbon emissions at the local level.

The prize is awarded by the lottery-funded body Nesta, which encourages innovation in the UK.

The Green Valleys project in Wales’ Brecon Beacons currently generates power from 10 wild mountain streams.

The eventual aim of the venture is to make the Brecon area a net exporter of electricity.

‘Intelligent support’

Normally, hydro-power relies on dams but Brecon uses micro-hydro, which involves diverting up to 50% of a stream’s flow into buried pipes which lead to camouflaged generators. The project is planning 40 more of such micro-power stations.

With extra help from energy advice surgeries, super-efficient vehicles and wood-burning stoves, 13 local communities in Brecon have cut carbon emissions by about 20% in a year, according to Nesta.

Grenville Ham, who founded Green Valleys, said the Environment Agency imposed strict rules to protect the water level of the streams and ensure that wildlife in the streams was not harmed. National Park rules ensured that the schemes were heavily disguised visually.

“We put a few rocks into a stream to ensure that enough water is held back to cover the inlet to the pipe,” he said.

“Then the pipes have a mesh on so fish can’t get caught. And the generators are all housed in huts no bigger than a garden shed and built of local stone with turf roofs. We normally put them among farm buildings so they blend in.”

Lord Puttnam, chairman of the Nesta judges, said: “Whilst Copenhagen showed just how difficult it is to reach consensus amongst governments, the Big Green Challenge shows how local efforts can triumph.

“When people are empowered and are given intelligent support they can make the world of difference in the fight against climate change”.

Enterprise

Another prize-winner is the Isle of Eigg, where 38 families are working together in a bid to halve their carbon emissions.

The initiative is being led by the Isle of Eigg Heritage Trust and involves a wide range of projects from installing insulation and solar panels to producing local food and developing low-carbon community transport.

They are attempting to live within a five kilowatt (kW)/household energy cap. The trust says its approach has generated interest from Ecuador, Galapagos and Alaska, as well as Birmingham and Edinburgh. Nesta says Eigg cut CO2 emissions in the past year by 32%.

The other £300,000 prize was taken by Ludlow’s Household Energy Service – a volunteer-led company that helps households reduce carbon emissions, improve energy efficiency and save money on fuel bills.

It provides free energy surveys – conducted by volunteers – that identify practical energy-saving measures along with estimates of the financial savings they could generate.

HES has expanded into Shropshire, Herefordshire, Radnorshire and Montgomeryshire – increasing its reach to 15,000 homes. HES cut CO2 emissions in the past year by 10%, according to Nesta.

While Nesta applauds the enterprise of community-led schemes, other energy analysts would point out that for the UK to achieve its long-term emissions targets there would need to be a revolution in energy generation and supply way beyond the reach of small communities like these.